Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BRITAIN’S POLICY IN SPAIN

HOUSE OF LORDS DEBATE

HAS NEUTRALITY BEEN OBSERVED?

ALLEGED BETRAYAL OF LOYALISTS

United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received November 27, 6.30 p.m.) LONDON, November 26. The position in Spain was the subject of a short debate in the House of Lords to-day. Lord Snell and others expressed opinion that the legal government had been rather shabbily treated. Lord Cecil: It is unfortunate that one side has been adopted by certain Governments, while at any rate, one Government has adopted the other. He thought the British policy which established real neutrality was right at first, but he was not so sure now. “It looks as though the policy of keeping out of the ring has been betrayed,” concluded Lord Cecil.

Sensational Statement

Lord Faringdon said - that friends from Catalonia had told him that priests had been shot, not because they were priests, but because they were rebel agents. He had tried to confirm the stories of nuns being burned, but had been unable. There had been assassinations in government territory, but never assassinations supported by the government which deplored them. Had'the British Government any information about the massacres at Badajoz and the Rio Tinto mines. These were ordered by the rebel Government. “When you have a man like General De Lano, broadcasting with delight the latest atrocities, we can only hope he is the drunkard we know him to be."

British Attitude Defined

Lord Plymouth described some of Lord Faringdon’s remarks as. deplorable. The Government denied that its policy of non-intervention had operated against the Spanish Government, in favour of General Franco. The Government’s policy had prevented, and could still prevent the enlargement of the conflict beyond the Spanish borders, and had also greatly reduced the amount of arms that might have been imported into Spain. The Government had thus saved suffering from the Spanish people. The Government was aware that breaches of the nonintervention agreement had been committed by more than one signatory, and had transmitted evidence to the committee. Both Italy and Germany had given assurances that they would not abandon non-intervention. Britain did not recognise General Franco, but was maintaining unofficial contact for the protection of British interests in the portions of Spain under his control.

Italy’s Undertaking Dealing with the allegations that Majorca had really become an Italian island, Lord Plymouth said: I think it is general knowledge that there are a considerable number of Italians on the island, but the Government had received assurances from Italy of the absence of any intentions regarding the Balearic Islands. Lord Cecil asked if the Government would consider publishing the exact terms of the assurances.

Lord Plymouth replied in the affirmative. He concluded by regretting that there was little basis at present for reconciliation between the Spanish combatants. Therefore the Government did not consider the moment opportune for- an offer of mediation, but will lose no time to make its contribution towards peace if opportunity did arise.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THD19361128.2.98

Bibliographic details

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20587, 28 November 1936, Page 17 (Supplement)

Word Count
491

BRITAIN’S POLICY IN SPAIN Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20587, 28 November 1936, Page 17 (Supplement)

BRITAIN’S POLICY IN SPAIN Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20587, 28 November 1936, Page 17 (Supplement)