BRITISH POLICY IN CHINA.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 8 April 1927, Page 9

BRITISH POLICY IN CHINA.

Discussed in Parliament.

LABOUR’S VIGOROUS ATTACK

By Cable —Press Association—Copyright. Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.

■LONDON, April 7.

In the House of Commons there was a crowded attendance when Mr Ramsay MacDonald initiated a debate on China. He said no one could say what was going to happen. The despatch of the .Shanghai defence force had undoubtedly increased our negotiating difficulties without increasing the protection, for Britishers outside Shanghai. It had also fed the traditional Chinese suspicion, though he believed this was without foundation. Not Shanghai but the whole of China was the immediate test of our policy. Nobody could say before inquiry what had happened in Nankin, therefore he urged the Government to use the League method of inquiry. Personally he waa most glad that Britain, America and Japan to-day were presenting Notes, not ultimata. There should be a clear statement that we still stood where We were at Christmas. If the League of Nations could make the Nankin inquiry it would do a tremendous lot of good. He hoped Sir Austen Chamberlain would not decline the use of the League. They should know what was in the mind of the War Office in sending out more troops, and how far we were acting alone in such matters: It was not in British interests, as the market for our goods was circumscribed and barred by prejudice, and ill will. The Chinese had learned the power of the boycott. “One-Eyed.” Mr R. Mitchell Banks, K.C. (Conservative) said Mr MacDonald’s speech recalled the proverb that in the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man was king. He wished Mr MacDonald cpuld give some vision to his party, hut unfortunately his kingdom was governed not from the throne but from the anti-chamber. Mr MacDonald had said the revolutionary propaganda in the East was based on history, but Mr Mitchell Banks declared that the Independent Labour Party was busy preparing a history upon wh'ch to base propaganda. If anybody spread suspicion it was the Labour Party by its meetirgs and resolutions, and if there should be a disaster they would be its chief authors. If Sir Austen Chamberlain had to defend himself it would be ggainst pushing the virtue of patience almost to a fault. Call for Minister. After Mr Wedgwood (Labour) had epoken there were loud cries of “Chamberlain.”

The Deputy Speaker called on Sir Alfred Mond, but the interruption con-

tinued.

Mr Moseley shouted: “We are debating the Government’s policy without hearing what it is.” Sir Alfred Mond began amidst a chorus of Labour interruptions and cries of “Poison gasl” The Speaker warned both Messrs Purcell and Beckett, who consistently intenupted Sir Alfred Mond.

Sir Austen Chamberlain, replying, Eaid the whole, city of Shanghai had been created by foreigners and it had existed and prospered because of foreigners. Britain was ready to negotiate to meet the Nationalise aspect and remove the special conditions rendered necessary by past conditions as soon as China could give foreigners the' same justice and security os the Chinese obtained elsewhere i» the civilised world.

Looting in. Nankin, he said, had .continued unchecked to April 4. The officer in charge of the Nationalists had sent a warning that any Britisher going ashore would bo shot. Similar incidents had occurred at Chekiang, JCTfang and other places under the control of the Nationalst»

Lively Exchanges. "While Sir Austen Chamberlain was feuding the report on Iciiang, Mr Wallhead fLabour), interiected: “It sounds like a students' rag day.” This was followed b.v cries of COrderl”

Sir Austen Chamberlain asked “What interest does the Member gervo by minmising these outrages.”

Mr Wallhead: “Nothin* I have heard justifies the war!” Sir Austen Chamberlain continued that Britain must know the attitude of responsible Clvnese authorities towards the outrages. He believed that all the Powers were in substantial agreement on the necessity of requiring redress, but he did not want to speak too confidently. He knew that an agreement; had been reached by the Ministers at Pekin, but was not absolutely certain, regarding the attitude of their Governments thereon. Ad the indications were that Japan, the United States aiid ourselves were not merely in agreement on the matter of asking for reparations, but regarding what reparations should he asked.

Challenge to Labour. The Nationalist authorities, Sir Austen went on to say, must understand that their reputation as a Government and the honour of China require them to give full satisfaction and reparation. He read the British vice-Consul’s report on the outrages in Nankin, and pointed out that looting was continuing there without the Chinese authorities Attempting to interfere. A similar state of affairs prevailed in every place under the Nationalists’- control, including looting and outrages in hospitals. These attacks were not confined t,o British subjects or interests. Th» most

significant feature of the present debate

was that (he Labourites-were unmoved v and were again demanding the recall of the defence. ' Did the Labourites desire expose the Britishers in Shanghai to the dangers realised in Nankin? Tli© Government was pur-

su;ng a policy of conciliation and adjustment to meet new Chinese aspirations. Sir Austen Chamberlain concluded, amidst cheers: “But wo are not prepared to bustle out of China, withdraw our nationals from Shanghai and other places, or to allow them to be treated as though the Jives of our peohle were of no account Mr Lloyd George paid a tribute to the courage with which Mr Austen Chamberlain had faced a difficult task, and continued: Pursue the policy specificate la : d down a few months ago I

The Rt. Hon. C. P. Trevelvan (Labour) said: If wo went to war against China we should probably do so alone and our trade would pass into the hands of the Powers standing aloof.

Labourites forced a division on a motion for the adjournment of the debaie which was defeated bv 27/ to 17.