PLENTY OF OPPOSITION

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 137, 7 December 1938, Page 23

PLENTY OF OPPOSITION

BRITISH POLICY

A PROFESSOR'S VIEWS

That large sections of public opinion in England were opposed to the policy of the Chamberlain Government was maintained by Professor A. W. Sewell, of Auckland University College, when he lectured last night to members of the Wellington branch of the Left Book Club, of whom there were almost 250 present. Professor Sewell, who recently returned from abroad, described great meetings held in Britain, by various schools of thought opposed to the Government, indicating that on all sides there was dissatisfaction with the present policy. The most disturbing aspect from the public point of view was the denial of "all morality in international dealings. The Chamberlain policy was that everything must be done to keep the country out of war. No matter what the commitments, no matter what the obligations, under the League of Nations Covenant, the vital and important goal was the avoidance of all entanglements. Thus it was that the Chamberlain Government was steadily "drifting" into a complete understanding with Germany in which the .bargain would be struck that Germany would be given a free tiand in Eastern Europe, :in the Ukraine and Rumania, .provided the west was left alone.

Against this policy was ranged a number of different groups, including a section of the Conservative Party itself. This section considered such a policy extremely dangerous, sirjee it isolated Britain from ail her possible friends and left her open to any alliance of enemies. There were also those who saw in this surrender to Fascism a world-wide menace to freedom, democracy, and the present standard of living of the workers. The policy pursued would, in his view, lead eventually to the establishment of a thoroughgoing anti-militarism in Britain. But most significant of all were those who believed in the sanctity of treaties and the obligations resting on the Government to honour its treaty commitments, especially those contracted through membership of the League of Nations.

Asked what could be done in New Zealand, the speaker suggested among other things a wider public support of the attitude of the New Zealand High Commissioner, Mr. W. J. Jordan, in his insistence on the carrying out of the Covenant of the League of Nations.