POLITICAL SENSATION.

Hokitika Guardian, 29 October 1924, Page 2

POLITICAL SENSATION.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. AIK AIacDONALD’ BEbJEF. LONDON, Oct. 27. ATr Abu-Donald, in a speech, said he believes the Zinovielf documents are authentic. LONDON, *Vt. .07. lta.kov.sky transmitted to the Foreign Office the Soviet reply with reference to the statements that the Zinovieir letter was known to Air MacDon. tld and Mr Henderson nearly three weeks prior to its publication. Air Henderson to-day declared that no such document was received by the Home Office of Scotland Yard or by Air Henderson personally, from any quarter. His first information of the existence of the document was through the columns of the newspapers on the 23th. October. Thirteen A 1 misters at present express ignorance of ZinovicfT’s letter. The "Daily News” points otit the Labour Party's manifesto suggests tho Foreign Office and not Mr MacDonald was responsible lor the decision of authenticity and the publication of Ziuovieff’s letter. Alany of Air AlacDcmald’s friends, rightly or wrongly assert Air AlacDon:ild i s not yet convinced of the authenticity and it is significant that Mr Thomas, after a telephoned discussion with Air MacDonald publicly expiossod his doubts. He hinted that Afr MacDonald drafted the reply, instructing its despatch when authenticity was proved. The Foreign Office becoming convinced lie sent a note. Air AlcAlanu.s, speaking at Alanchester. said he was in Russia when tho note was written. ‘‘Why should Zinovieff,” he said, ‘‘write me in London, when lie was living next door in AToscow. I personally met Zinovieff before ami after 13th. Sept.” All! .MACDONALD’S REPLY. LONDON. October 27. Air R. AtacDomild, speaking at Cardiff said: This election stalled with a mare’s nest, the ‘’Workers’ Meekly” case; and it is likely to finish with a mare’s nest the "great Russian Rod

plot!” The assertion that when the Government refused an inquiry into the "Workers’ AVeekly” case, it had information of ramifications of Communist activity in Britain far more serious than the House of Commons mill the country were allowed to know, is a malicious untruth. The facts are that the Government was defeated on September Bth. 'I his ‘l’cil’ plot letter did not find its way to the Foreign Office until September 10th. It was not put into the Department till Sept. I t. and it was sent to me at Alanehestor on September 13. I received it on September 10. I minuted that tho

greatest care must lie taken in discovering whether it was authentic, and that, if so. it must lie published immediately. In the meantime, while other investigations were pun ceding to discover its authenticity, the ilralt of a letter to Al. Rakovsky was prepared, so that when, and if, authenticity were established no time should he lost in protesting to the Soviet Government. Alv minute was received by the Foreign Department on Septemebr ]i. A trial lira ft was sent on September 21 at Abcravon for my observations. 1 was absent in my son’s constituency, and I did not renin* it until September 23. I altered the draft on September 21. and sent it. back in its altered [inin, expecting it to be returned to me with the proofs of authenticity; but it was published that night. (Cries of shame.) "I make no complaints about the Foreign (Mice, and everyone of my colleagues knows that I will not tolerate this propaganda.” LONDON, October 28. Air AhicDonald said at Cardiff: "On a'count of my known determination In stand firmly by the Russian agreement and Treaty, as if they were holy writ when my signature was attached, they a vanned that tli**y were carrying ml mi wishes in taking steps immediately to j> ll l l l isii the whole allair. They honestly believed the document to ho authentic, anil they acted in that belief. If they acted precipitately, what is the accusation against us? Why do not tin* newspapers say we were in too great haste? H the Foreign Office had been in the hands of either the Tories or the Liberals that letter would have taken weeks to get through the various sieves. The rapidity of action and business-like way of handling the matter shows the Government’s determination to stand no nonsense, and is a conspicuous example of tlie new way of conducting foreign affairs. If the Zinovieff letter is a forgery, it .shows the amount of scoundrcliness that surrounds us. Alv experience lias made it imucssihle for me not to he suspicious. If it is genuine, then depend upon it, so long as there i.s a Labour Government and I am responsible for it. I will handle with firmness and determination every attempt by any outside power to interfere in our internal affairs. LONDON. October 28.

At'Cardiff the Prime Minister described as lies the wonderful stories published in the newspapers with regard to the progress of the document through the Post Office to the Foreign Office.

lie said it was an eleventh hour attempt to entangle the Government am’ get the election light over with a cloud of suspicion hanging over the countrv.

Mr MacDonald said, in conclusion; T am the most innocent man of the lot of you! I was out of London. 1 had to get information, which still was coming in. because [ am going to probe this thing to the roots. It will be my first job. when I return to Loudon, to discover how this thing originated, and who is behind it. and you will get the whole story.”

He wanted to know how a certain London newspaper, which prided itself on having forced the Government’s hands, came to have a copy of the letters and how the Conservative headquarters which for clays had been talking of ‘•.springing a mine under the Government's feet" became possessed of tbc letter. ‘‘l know.” be said, .•‘the letter may have originated anywhere. How can a simple, honestminclecl person avoid tlie' suspicion that the whole thing is another gunpowder (licit.

The matter is in no wise finished. Until it is finished, the best tiling is to leave it with the Government.”

DENIAL OF COMPLICITY. LONDON. October 28. With reference to Mr MacDonald's speech at Cardiff. the Conservative headquarters promptly issued a statement asserting it only learned of the existence of the Zinovieff letter when the Foreign Office published it.

LONDON. October 28. Mr R. MacDonald (Foreign Minister) in a later s(>oech in bis own constituency said: “I knocked the draft reply to Rakovsky into smithereens, and wrote something with my own hand, which T wanted to see again. Therefore, T did not initial it. Instead of sending me a fair copy for signature, the Foreign Office issued it themselves.” The Foreign Office repeats its conviction that the Zinovioff letter is not a forgery. The "Daily Telegraph's” Parliamentary correspondent says: Political circles consider the attempt to label the letter as a forgery is merely bluff. Meanwhile the Labour Socialists are

seriously disturbed, fearing the cfleets of exposure upon tho polls.” Air AlacDonald’s speech at Cardiff supplied texts for speeches by all tho Party lea.ders on Monday night. Air dynes, at Manchester, claimed the latest revelations show tlie Zinovieff affair to ho a desperate and disgraceful plot against the Labour Government. "Those who talk of the tainted hands of Russian representatives are showing the Brit.ish public that Russian hands may he cleaner than theirs! It i.s a dangerous thing for our enemies to stoop to methods which may embroil us with other nations !’’ Air Austen Chamberlain, at Birmingham. said that before the Prime Al blister authorised the despatch of tlie note to the Soviet, he must have satisfied himself the Zinovieff letter was not a forgery. A’et, apparently, every other member of the Cabinet was wholly in the dark. AVhy was the information with-held? The Prime Alinister is not an autocrat. The gravest feature of the present political .situation is that behind the responsible Alinisters there is a junta of back-bench extremists wlm call the Alinisters to account and upset their policy. Air Asquith, at Paisley, said: "If Air AfacDonald believed the Zinovieff letter genuine, he has had in his pocket during most of the election period the most convincing proof that the Soviet Government intended to break a most solemn provision of the Treaty. It is incredible that such a menacing document was not circulated among Cabinet Alinisters before it was given to the world.”