“A GRAVE MATTER”

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 26 July 1929, Page 5

“A GRAVE MATTER”

REFERENCE IN HOUSE OF LORDS (Received 26tli .Inlv, 9.25 a.m.) LONDON, 25th July. Directly tlie House of Lords met Lord Salisbury asked the reasons governing the Ministry’s actions in tlio grave matter of Lord Lloyd’s resignation, which had so unpleasantly astonished the country and Parliament. Obviously the initiative had been the Government’s. Lord Lloyd’s statement- that his views were unlikely to be in harmony with the Government’s indicated some change. Having regard to our communications with India, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa through Egypt, this was a matter of national concern and could not be decided to suit the exigencies of the Socialist Party. It went to tlie very heart of the Empire. What was tlie reason for the dramatic stroke now resounding in every eastern bazaar? Did the Government ask A-is tralia and New Zealand if they were prepared to change the policy? Lord Salisbury paused for a while, and then continued: “The Lord President sits silent. No doubt sucli communication has been made. The Government cannot decide questions of foreign policy • without communicating with the dominions. This is a test of the Government’s capacity to conduct tlie administration of the Empire." Lord Parmoor, replying, asked if Lord Salisbury had in mind Sir Austen Chamberlain’s despatch to Lord Llovd on 28th May.

Lord Salisbury: I have. It is not consonant with Parliamentary practice to refer to a despatch without reading

Lord Parmcor : “I must refuse to read it. One has to be careful on matters of foreign policy.” Lord Salisbury: ‘‘That despatch did not give the Government the right to take the action it did.” Lord ParmocA' denied any change in continuity of policy. The Government desired to enable Egypt to lie an independent sovereign county in regard to internal affairs. ‘‘We desire to carry out successfully the negotiations .Mr MacDonald initiated in 1924. it is an entire mistake to- suggest discourtesy to Lord Lloyd.” The entire Government regretted that he found it conscientiously necessary to resign. It was the Government's right, ,if it thought the foreign policy not in accordance with national interests, to modify it. in the best interests of this country and the world at. large. There would be m> change, in respect In the four reservations and the Sudan. The charge dial the resignation had been provoked was not altogether correct. Several members pressed for the pro.duetiou of Mr Henderson’s telegram, and complained that it was not right to ask the House of Lords to await information till Mr Henderson spoke tomorrow. in the House of Lords Lord Brentford asserted that Lord Lloyd never disregarded any of Hie late Government’s instructions. It had the fullest confidence m him. Lord Pussncld intervened to explain that the dominions were taken into confidence regarding negotiations with Egypt. Replying to Lord Brentford, Lord Passlield said the resignation had nothing to do with jjie negotiations. Lord Birkenhead said : ‘‘l have rea- | son for saving that negotiations were : actually in progress between the Government and high Egyptian personages without Lord Lloyd being informed. If true, nothing more scandalous has happened. A minority Government had no right to make hold and novel experiments in the fabric of Empire. 1 If its purpose is to do so, behind Par-

linment T will use the. whole of rny iufllienco to remove it from power.’ The matter then dropped. PRESS COMMENT LONDON, 25th July. The “Daily Chronicle’s" political correspondent states that Mr Baldwin’s Cabinet was seriously divided over Egypt. .Sir Austen Chamberlain endeavoured to pursue a policy too liberal to please Lord Lloyd, who, however, was hacked up by Mr Churchill. .Lord Lloyd’s request for warships whenever a situation requiring statesmanship developed did not coni mend itself to Sir Austen Chamebrhiiii. The “Morning J.’ost" says there were occasions when Lord Lloyd differed from the late Chief Secretary of State, but such difference being discussed and settled, Lord Lloyd loyally carried out the adopted policy. He thus earned and enjoyed the trust and support of the late administration. “Wp. have no hesitation in saving that the immediate cause of his disgraceful treatment lies in the enmity and intrigues of extremists in Egypt working with the left wing of the Labourites here, it also means that the British Government intends to work for the restoration of the so-called parliamentary rule which brought such confusion and disorder into Egyptian allairs.” “The Times” says it is clear that Lord Lloyd’s relations with the Foreign Office had been strained long before Sir Austen Chamberlain left it, and Mr Henderson bad done little more than take up his predecessor’s legacy. Lord Lloyd’s natural characteristics are those of an active administrator, not those of a diplomatist. The Duke of York visited King Fuad of Egypt, who is at present staying at the Rita Hotel. LORD LLOYD’S SUCCESSOR (Received 261 li July, 1 p.m.) LONDON, 25th July. Lord Passfield’s name is mentioned as successor to Lord Lloyd, but well-in-formed circles believe it will be Lord Olivier.