“MARE’S NEST.”

Wairarapa Age, 29 October 1924, Page 5

“MARE’S NEST.”

MR. MACDONALD’S DEFENCE. SURROUNDED BY SCOUNDRELS. (Press Association—Copyright.) London, Oct. 27.—Mr Macdonald, at Cardiff, said the elpetion started with the mare’s nest of the “..Workers’ Weekly” case, apd was likely to finish with" the mare’s nest of a great Russian Red plot. Great Precautions Taken. The Government defeated this Red plot on October 8, but the letter did not find its way 'to the Foreign Office until the 10th. “It was not put into the Department until the 14th, and it was sent to me at Manchester on the 15th. “I made a minute that the greatest care must be taken in discovering whether it was authentic. If so, it must be published immediately. In the meantime, while investigations were proceeding, a draft of a letter to M. Rakovsky was prepared, so that no time should bo lost in protesting to the Soviet Government. “My minutes was received by,the Department on October 17, and a trial draft was sent to me on the 21st at Aberavon for observations. I was absent in my son’s constituency, and did not receive it until the 23rd. I altered the draft on the 24th, and sent it back in its altered form, expecting it to be returned to me with the proofs of authenticity; but it was published that night. (Cries of “Shame! ”) Won’t Tolerate Propaganda. “I make no complaints. The Foreign Office and every one of my colleagues know that I will not tolerate -this propaganda.” —(A. add N. (Received 8.5 p.m.) London, Oct. 28.—“0n account of my known determination,” Mr Macdonald continued, to stand firmly by the Agreement and the Treaty as though they were Holy Writ when my signature was attached, they assumed that they were carrying out my wishes in taking steps immediately to publish the whole affair. They honestly believed the document was authentic, and they acted in that belief. What is the charge? “If.-they acted precipitately what is the accusation against us? Why do not the newspapers say we arc in too great haste? If the Foreign Office had been in the Bantis of- either the Tories or the Liberals that letter would have taken weeks to get through the various sieves. The rapidity of action and businesslike way of handling the Government’s determination to stand no nonsense is a conspeiuous example of the new way of conducting foreign affairs. If the Zinovieff letter is a forgery it shows the amount of scoundrelliness that, surrounds us. My experience has made it impossible for me not to be suspicious. If it is genuine depend upon it so long as there is a Labour Government and I am responsible for sit I Will handle with firmness and determination, every attempt by an outside Power to interfere in our internal affairs.”—(Reuter.)

TAINTED HANDS. (Received 7.30 p.m.) London, Oct. 28.—Mr J. R. Clynes, at Manchester, claimed that the latest revelations show that the Zinovieff affair was a desperate and disgraceful plot against the Labour Government. “Those who talk of the tainted hands are showing the British public that Russian hands may be cleaner than theirs. It is a dangerous thing for our enemies to stopp to usq methods which may embroil us with other nations.”—(A. and N.Z.) “MERELY A BLUFF.” EFFECT ON THE POLLS. (Received 7.30 p.m.) London, Oct. 28.—The Foreign Office repeats its conviction that the Zinovieffi letter is not a forgcry.The Gravest Feature. Mr Austen Chamberlain, at Birmingham, said “Before the Primo Minister authorised the despatch of the Note to the Soviet he must have satisfied himself that the Zinovieff letter was not a forgery; yet, apparently, every other member of the Cabinet was wholly in the dark. Why was the information withheld? The Prime Minister is not an autocrat. The gravest feature of the present political situation is that, behind the responsible Ministers, there is a junta of backbench extremists who call the Ministers to account and upset their policy.” Mr H. H. Asquith, at Paisley, said that if Mr Macdonald believed the Zinovieff letter to be genuine “he has had in his pocket during most of the election period uiost convincing proof that the Soviet Governont intends tp break the most solemn provision of the Treaty. It is incredible that such a. menacing document was not circulated among Cabinet members before it was given to the world.” Mr Macdonald, in a later speech, in bis own constituency, said, “I knock; cd the draft reply to Rakovsky into smithereens, and wrote something with my own hand, which I wanted to see again. Therefore, I did not initial it. Insead of; sending me -a fair copy for signature, ’the Foreign Office issued it themselves.”—(A. and N.Z.)