The Timaru Herald THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1934. THE AIMS OF THE BLACK SHIRTS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVIII, Issue 19945, 1 November 1934, Page 8

The Timaru Herald THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1934. THE AIMS OF THE BLACK SHIRTS

“Jews owe no allegiance to this country, but only to their friends and kin in other countries,” so says Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Fascists, and one time member of the Imperial Cabinet. Thus, the little Fascist Party on British soil, reveals its true foolishness, and gives justification for the amusement with which it is regarded throughout the Empire. However, it is almost sad to learn that a man who saw Jewish sons defending the life of the nation on the fields of France, can so openly and vehemently state that for England, Jews have no allegiance. Across No Man’s Land, those Jewish sons faced their kin in the German ranks: but yet according to Sir Oswald Mosley, Jews only give allegiance to their friends and kin in other countries. Not among the aliens in internment camps, were many Hebrew sons found during the war, and surely even Sir Oswald Mosely knows that no greater patriotism can a man show than to offer to lay down his life for his country. Since the war, leading Jewish speakers throughout the world have oftimes stated that tlibir race appreciates and respects the tolerance it receives in fhe great Commonwealth of British nations. Some of the great men whom Britain calls hers, were Jews, and in the development of the Empire, it cannot be said that the Jews have not taken an honourable part. Many instances showing how members of' the race have performed capable service, could be given, and the list would include many great names—from Disraeli to the present Governor-General of Australia. It will take more than a Mosely masquerading as a. Hitler to brush aside plain justice that has grown up with the British race; for not while Britons are British, will they revert to the tyranny and persecution that was rampant in Enrope during its mediaeval times, and that is becoming rampant in Germany’s part of Europe to-day. But for the Nazis in Germany the day of reckoning is approaching; and the surrender of Herr nitler before the indigliation of the Church is a significant development. British liberty was centuries in the making, and the history of those centuries shows that liberty was only won gradually and with a struggle; and part of that hard-won liberty was the removal of Jewish disabilities. When that liberty was granted, it closed the history of religious persecution in Britain and was a coping stone to the broad-based legislation for religious toleration. Indeed, it is, of course, paradoxical that a talkative Black Shirt can take advantage of the liberty belonging to Briain, to demand restrictions of that liberty to fellow citizens. The truth is of course, to quote one of our famous authors, “bigotry will never want a pretence,” and, it is well that Britain allows such bigotry adequate freedom to talk, because then all men may hear. Not easily will Britons sacrifice that freedom which is even granted to bigotry. Sir Oswald Mosely, on his part, should know (because he once fought in a war waged for the preservation of the sacred freedom), that Britons are made of sterner stuff than the European people who are carried away under many coloured shirts. He should know, too, that , Britons cherish the heritage that has some down to them through long years of struggle and has established the freedom of all classes upon an unassailable foundation.

MARKETS FOR DAIRY PRODUCTS.

Critics who are prone to “blame the Government” for all the troubles that have beset various sections of the primary industry in the Dominion, will no doubt learn with interest something of the plight into which (he dairy industry has been cast in other countries. The cable messages this morning indicate that the Dutch producers are in a parlous plight. “Owing to the continued increase in the - output of dairy produce and the difficulty of exporting butter and cheese, especially to Germany, which is Holland’s chief market, the Dutch Government, according to The Hague correspondent of The Daily Telegraph, has decided to reduce the milk subsidy in 19313, and has ordered the slaughter of 150,000 milk cows.” Manifestly another country is becoming alarmed at the high productive capacity of well-selected herds. Tt is, of course, something of a paradox that while millions of people in Europe are without adequate food, several countries that are richly endowed by nature, are being forced to restrict the production of foodstuffs by the slaughter of large herds of milk cows. Tt is plain, of course, that the unsound economic situation that has been developing in Germany for some months must inevitably place severe restrictions on her import trade; in other words, because of the refusal of foreign countries to purchase Germany’s exportable goods, the German people find it impossible to purchase muchneeded Dutch butter. Somewhat similar economic laws are operating in Britain, but in a lesser degree of violence. In a measure,

however, the manner in which the Homeland has faced and survived the economic crisis has won the admiration of the whole world. Manifestly, British courage and vision have received due reward. Unemployment has diminished, the public finances are on a sounder basis than those of any other nation, and Britain’s position as the financial centre of the world has been more firmly established than ever before. To the Overseas Dominions, Britain’s recovery has been a source of gratification. Materially, it is of vital importance because to-day, even more than in the past, the United Kingdom is the market to which Australia and New Zealand has to look for the sale of their exportable agricultural produce. If Britain’s markets shrink, the effect will be just as disastrous to the producers of Australia and New Zealand as the inability of Germany to purchase her normal requirements of butter, has been to the dairymen of Holland. It is recognised that the policy of intense agricultural protection which is being pursued by Continental countries, has resulted in the virtual closing of these markets to agricultural imports. The Dutch are already feeling the pinch. How long the Continental countries will be able to maintain this policy, it is hard to say. Sooner or 1 later the need for reciprocal trade will compel more mutually satisfactory arrangements. But in the meantime the producers in Ausralia and New Zealand, must realise that the United Kingdom is the only market of any use to agricultural countries. Hence it is felt that Britain’s new agricultural policy has raised some serious questions. Britain, on her part, is dependent on her exports of manufactured goods: moreover, the Old Land is a creditor country, which draws into her coffers by way of invisible imports the returns from her millions of investments in overseas countries. The question then that must be faced in London, Ottawa, Canberra and Wellington, is how far is Britain’s new policy for the protection of her agriculture likely to affect such countries as Canada, Australia and New Zealand, who are her best customers and in which she has great financial interests? If the Overseas Dominions are unable to sell their produce how far will their plight affect their purchasing capacity and their ability to meet their obligations. Moreover, the Overseas Dominions can give Britain something neither the Argentine nor Denmark could give, and that is an outlet for her population. In the great days of her prosperity Britain could not absorb the whole of her people, and she would again have to look to the Dominions to absorb these people. Only by intra-imperial trading can a new economic stability be found. Hence it is obvious that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand could not absorb fresh population unless they are prosperous, and their prosperity in these days depends, more than ever, on the prosperity of Great Britain.