BRITAIN AND RUSSIA.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 28 May 1927, Page 5

BRITAIN AND RUSSIA.

SEVERING OF RELATIONS. DISCUSSION iN COMMONS. Press Association-Electric Telegraph-Copyright. LONDON, Thursday. The discussion on the decision of the Government to break off diplomatic relations with the Soviet Government was opened in a crowded House of Commons by Mr J. iR. Clynes (Lab.), Deputy Leader of tlic Opposition, who moved th 0 following resolution: — That, having hoard the statement of the Prime Minister, this' House is of) opinion that the termination of the Trade Agreement with Russia and the severance of diplomatic relations would Have a serious international consequence, and close a promising avenue to the restoration of trade and industry, and is, therefore, a policy to which the country ought not to be committed until the report of a Select Committee, based upon the examination of all relevant documents and a full Inquiry into fact's, lias been submitted to this House.

Mr Clynes said that Sir Austen Chamberlain in his last address on foreign relations pointed out that the severance of relations with Russia would be harmful, not only to internal interests, but to the future peace of Europe. The Earl of Balfour, in the House of Commons,, committed the Government to the same views. The Opposition, therefore, were entitled to ask how-these views would be affected by. a reversal of policy. He understood that the Government view was that Russia was in the dock. Labour accepted that position, but demanded that Russia should not be condemned without a trial. Therefore, lie suggested an adequate inquiry. “The truth,” Mr Clynes said, “will not be found by means of wall-break-ing and safe-breaking implements, which were used to a futile end in the Areos building.” The Labour Party, he continued, had long repudiated Communist purposes and methods, and had no partisan motive in present course. “We do not excuse wrongdoing,” he said, “but we demand on the part of both Governments that pledges which are binding- are honourably served.” The motion was submitted because Labour was honestly convinced that the allegations should be tested and the truth revealed. The Government’s methods were the closest imitation of the Communists’. « They were giving the Communists the finest advertisement in the world, which would strengthen Communist propaganda. Referring to the effect af the decision upon trade, Mr Clynes said that the Midland Bank had almost completed arrangements to lend Russia £lO,000,000 to be spent in Britain on electrical equipment, mining machinery, and machine tools. “Our industrial position,” lie said, “is such that we cannot afford to drive back potential customers and remove further away an immense market of a hundred million people.” The new policy, he continued, was the first fruits of long campaigning begun in 1917. It was complained that Russia interfered in our affairs. Wo had first interfered" in Russia with an invading army. Sir Austen Chamberlain replied immediately. He said that Mr Clynes had found it necessary to walk gently, but he had committed himself to a condemnation of the Government’s policy, without an idea of th e grounds on which the action was taken. Trade did not depend on the Trade Agreement or diplomatic representation. America had traded freely, yet had not recognised the Soviet, and did not admit a trade delegation. The Government was not prepared to accept a select committee. He asked the House for a clear expression of confidence. He deemed it unnecessary and undesirable to produce further information than that contained in tli e White Paper, but plenty of other evidence of Soviet activities was’ offering. The Zinovieff Letter was not the only or the last document. Th G Trade Agreement had been systematically and continually broken, and its privileges abused. Soviet House, Sir Austen said, was the seat of political propaganda and anti-British action. Chesham House similarly also abused its diplomatic privileges. These activities were proceeding under the orders of a Government which was pursuing a hostile policy, while professing friendly relations throughout the world. The Government could no longer take the responsibility of maintaining diplomatic relations so conducted and so abused. They were not an instrument of peace, but. a fresh continual source of irritation and danger. Had the Government considered only their own interests, they would have acted long ago. For two and a half years they had pleaded for peace between the two countries, and urged the Soviet to mend its ways. Further patience would have been weakness.

Mr Arthur Ponsonby (Lab.) said that he was sure Sir Austen Chamberlain regretted the Government’s precipitate step. Regarding spies and lying there was no need to charge the Russians any more than others. Forgery, theft, lying, bribery', and corruption existed in every Foreign Oflice and Chancellery the world wide. Mr Roy Wilson (C): “You suggest that British representatives abroad take part in the same kind of propaganda as the Russians?” Mr Ponsonby': “Our representatives would be neglecting their duty if. they did not discover secrets.” Sir Austen Chamberlain: “You are mistaken. It is not a part of our representatives’ duty to act in that way. ’ ’ Mr Ponsonby' continued: “In the course of iiy career I have seen a document stolen from the archiveas of a foreign country. I have travelled with a spy acting for a foreign Sovereign

who was trying to obtain the dispatch I was carrying. The more friendly the spy became, the more tightly I held cm to the. dispatch. *’ ■ Mr Ponsouby recalled the then Home Secretary’s statement . in 1921 regarding a forgery in the Russian newspaper “Pravda,” when the head of *tlie C.I.D. got a machine and cut off the margin because.it bore the name of an English printer. Miss Susan Lawrence (Lab.) said that the Government’s decision would encourage the most dangerous elements in Russia, and results here would be reflected in relieving offices and the Labour Exchanges land in other countries in profit, at our expense, in the •undeveloped markets of Russia and China. Colonel T. E. Russel-Moore (C.): — ‘ 1 This lesson will show the Russians that Britain will not tolerate interference with her Imperial and international affairs.”. Sir Edmund Turton, a director of the Midland Bank, said the statement that a credit of ten millions had been given by the bank to a Soviet trading organisation was wholly unwarranted. The arrangement contemplated orders being given in Britain up to ten millions. The contracts were subject to approval by the bank, and provided for a substantial payment, before the delivery of goods and bills for balance against a substantial deposit lodged with the bank by the Russians. No contract was submitted, consequently no agreement was in operation.

Sir William Joynson-Hicks, replying to the debate, said lie was aware for some time of tlie serious nature of the Russian organisation in England. After to-night there was reason to hope that the Soviet spy organisations would b c broken up finally. It was the most complete and nefarious system lie had ever encountered. No other Foreign Embassy had ever so degraded itself. As a result of tlie raid he possessed copies of a questionnaire placed in the hands of armed forces by Russian spies, endeavouring to obtain information regarding our aeroplanes and air-cooled engines, plans of new destroyers, plans of directional wireless, plans of men-o’-war, and also of our two latest warships. These they fl/id not got, and were not likely to get. The missing document was secret, containing infoimation most .useful to any foreign country. Information had been given him by the Secretary of War on May 11. I have in my possession at this moment a photographic copy of that document produced in the Arcos ingContinuing, Sir William said lie was considering what he should do with such information in his possession, when lie consulted the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary. The latter said then: “Very well, make the raid.” The missing document had been left at the Arcos building several days before the raid. The search for this missing paper had not been as successful as had been hoped, but he found one document of greater importance than the one he was seeking. It was a human document, namely, Anton Muller, a man whom he had known tor two years as one of the leaders of the Russian spy system, and employed as a cipher clerk right at the heart of operations. Mr R. Morrison (Lab.): What did you do with this human document? Sir William Joynson-Hicks: You can safely leave him to me. As soon as the debate has closed a dispatch will be sent to the Soviet Charge d’Affaires, after which I will decide what course will be - taken.

The Government amendment was carried by 367 votes to 118. The amendment set out that the House, while appreciating the long forbearance of the Government in face of acute provocation, applauded tlie decision to withdraw the diplomatic relations and privileges which had been so gravely abused, while putting no abstaelcs in tlie way of legitimate trading relations with Russia. —A.P.A. and “Sun.”

IN THEIR PROPER PLACE. (Received Saturday, 9.40 a.m.) BERLIN, Friday. The Soviet Embassy has applied for permission to transfer tlie London Arcos staff to Berlin to carry on British trading. It is believed the Ministry will consent on condition that only legitimate business with Britain is carried on. NOTE TO CHESHAM HOUSE. (Received Saturday, 10.40 a.m.) LONDON, Friday. The Government’s Note announcing a rupture was handed in at Chesham House at midday. It is understood that it does not exceed eight hundred words.