RUSSIAN RELATIONS

Hokitika Guardian, 28 February 1927, Page 3

RUSSIAN RELATIONS

THE SOVIET REPLY. ! [Australian & N.Z. Cablo Association.] '(Received this dav at 0.30 a.m.) * .MOSCOW. February 28. The Soviet reply to the British Note refers to the unquestionable fact of the unsatisfactory character of the relations between the Soviet and Britain, and cites the agreement signed by the Soviet in 1923, whereby the Soviet undertook not to support with funds or any other way, persons, bodies or agents whose aim is to spread discontent or foment rebellion in any part of tlie British Empire. The reply declares during the three and a-half years since the signing of the agreement the British Government has repeatedly reproached the Soviet for the alleged Infringement of the agreement and violation of the agreement signed by Lord Curzon in 1923, whereby the British undertook immediately to inform the Soviet of supposed infringement of obligations and not to allow cases to accumulate without making charges. The British Government has preferred to make general wholesale reproaches snve in the instance of the so-called Zinovieff letter, during the genera! election in Britain in 1924. The Zino-

viefl letter was subsequently proved to he a forged document. Thus the only definite charge was based on forged documents, while none of those who misinformed the British Government, were punished, though the letter at one time strained Anglo-Russian relations to the uttermost. The fact that Britain declined to accept the Russian proposals to submit to arbitration on the question of responsibility regarding international Communist organisations could only he taken ns a withdrawal of the accusations against the Sovii t. The reply points out there have been no agreements limiting the freedom of speech and press within the 1 borders of either country, and to bring published verbal utterances made within Soviet Russia into the scope of the 1920 agreement is an arbitral'.- extension of the limits of the agreement. The Note characterises as delusions the constant references by politicians and members of the British Government to alleged omnipresence and omnipotence of so-called Soviet agents. It deplores the unsatisfactory conditions of Anglo-Soviet relations, hut expresses the belief that explanations cannot be made by means of mutual accusations in press. Then follow the concluding paragraphs cabled earlier. The Note cites the speeches of Don I Birkenhead, Mr Churchill and other British statesmen regarding Russia and refers to attacks on Soviet representatives in London, saying British representatives in Moscow are never subjected to instills on the part of the Soviet press. RTGA. Felt. 27. The Soviet is holding meetings throughout, Russia. Siberia and Turkistan. especially of factory workers, protesting against the British Note and endeavouring to sound a tone of national indignation and passing rcsnltiions insisting that a worthy reply he ;ent, to Britain’s impudent, unfounded 1 i lemamls.

SOVIET’S REPLY. MOSCOW. Eeh. 27. The Soviet reply to tlie British note after tracing various phases in the relations of the two countries alleges that the British Government's communications with the Soviet ('lusciously infringe the usual intern itioi|il forms and customs, aid even elementary decency. It says that ihe British Government avoid hie settle cent of mutual claims and talks to the Soviet in a threatening tone It concludes that the Soviet will continue to pursue a peace loving policy, which excludes all aggressiveness towl'.rd oilier countries and will sincerely weic.mi': the British Government, if it coins to meet it in that path .