Second Edition. Great Britain

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXVIV, Issue 44, 27 January 1916, Page 6

Second Edition. Great Britain

LABOR AND THE WAR.

CONFERENCE AT BRISTOL.

LOYALTY OF THE SPEAKERS.

United Press .Association. " (Received 9.30 a.m.) LonffjU" January 26

Mr Anderson, iVI.P. presiding at the Labour Conference at Bristol representing 2,093,365 unionists, said: Militarism and democracy cannot live together in Germany or anywhere else where there,are signs of reaction. In Britain, Mr Lloyd George would like! to see the rules of the army apply to ■ the workshops, bnt he was not very ] successful in his attempt through tliC| Munitions- Act and the Military Ser-j vice Bill. They had not redeemed Mr Asquith’s pledge. Xo forms of words offered immunity from the risk of for-, ced industrial service, and any attempt to nse this weapon and coerce trades unionists would Wul to great bitterness and end in failure i and he emphasised that it was impossible in a country with great naval, great military, and great industrial power. After the war it would be a different world, and a hard bad world, unless Labour took a hand in shaping it.

Mr Sexton, on behalf of the Liverpool dockers, moved a resolution expressing horror at the German atrocities, and pledging the Conference to assist the Government as fat; as possible, in the successful prosecution of the war. Ho remarked that if Germany! won, nothirig else on God’s earth mattered.

Mr Mdlikan, of Liverpool, seconded the motion.

Mr Ramsay MacDonald appealed for foresight and toleration. He said they were too early and too late to pronounce on the qrigin of the war, and he asked the Conference not to divide on this question, lest they interfere with unity in fighting the common enemy.

THE MEETING’S APPROVAL.

1,502,000 FOR, 602,000 AGAINST.

(Received 12.50 p.m.)

London, January 26

Mr Roberts, M.P., said the situation demanded a clear statement from the Conference on their attitude on the •war. A whole-hearted support of the resolution would he ap encouragement to the boys in the trenches, to those in hospitals, and also to the Allies.

. Mr Gilmour (Scottish Miners’ representative) and Mr Wardle (Railwaymen’s Union) supported the resolution, which was carried amidst applause, the card of the vote showing 1,502,000 for and 602,000 against.

QUESTIONS IN THE COMMONS.

THE ADMIRALTY’S AFFAIRS.

(Received 12.50 p.m.) London, January 26

In tjie House of Commons, Mr Balfour, answering questions, said ; The Government has no evidence that Germany is possessed of seventeeninch guns. Every dockyard in Britain and the Mediterranean js working to its utmost capacity on new construction or repairs for ourselves and the Allies, but it was manifestly impossible'to add-to the magnitude of the preparations. Nothing had occurred to justify the Admiralty thinking that any serious error of judgment had occurred in connection with the various types of ships under construction.

THE BLOCKADE. SCANDINAVIAN OPINIONS, GERMAN PRESS COMMENT. London, January 25. ■ Mr Garvin, in the Observer, remarks that Sir E. Grey’s repudiation ot the charge that the foreign Office is practically feeding the Germans lias not settled the public conv’i .;tion that mere strangulation measures are possible.j Naval opinion on noth sides of the Atlantic agrees that 't is now possible to replace illegal Orders-in Council by a declared and regularised blockade. Other publicists point out that vic-j tory is more and more depending on the naval strangulation. A Copenhagen message says that the legality of the Orders-in-Comicil has never been admitted, but they have been accepted calmly because Britain’s war necessities were understood. If the trade agreements fail there will be ( a reversal of public opinion against England. Evil forebodings are general in Christiania and opinion especially in industrial circles, is bitterly anti-Bri-tish. The control of the seas is thought to be too arbitrary in view of the fact that no goods are in transit to Germany. The Customs and police are watchful and enforce the prohibition against export by confiscation, fine or imprisonment. Stockholm reports say that Swedish industry has already suffered through the dearth of raw materials. Owing to lack of sulphuric acid some paper mills are closing. The proposed tightening of the blockade is bitterly discussed. The suggestion of putting the nation on rations is regarded as impracticable and humiliating. The figures showing the increase of Swedish imports are said to he exaggerated and due to the

import of home necessities from the United States instead of from belligerents.

The German press is pretending to scoff at the blockade. The Munich Neuste Nachrichten suggests that the tightening is, like the blockade itself, mere humbug.

The Cologne Zeitnng says that first the English tried to make ns buy things that were not necessary in view of helping its bankruptcy, and is now trying to starve, us altogether. This is plain futility. London, January 25.

Mr Bonar Law was cheered in the House of Commons when he announced that New Zealand, by the end of June, )vould have raised sixty thousand men. Replying to a question, Mr C. Roberts said that the Indian Government had taken statutory powers to work the German-owned wolfram mines in India, and would prohibit export except to the United Kingdom. The House of Lords passed the Parliament Registration Bill. Lord Headley, speaking in London, said that, the nation was dissatisfied with the Foreign Office not backing up the Navy and apparently attempting to interfere and lessen sea power. He cited the recent new statistics as a proof of over squeamishness towards the Huns. AWKWARD QUESTIONS. THE MILITARY AND DRUNKENN ESS. (Received 1.45 p.m.) London, January 2G. In the House of Commons, Mr Tennant, replying to a question, said no British' soldiers had been shot in the United Kingdom for military offences. It was not in the public interest to. state the number shot in the forces Overseas, f>ut the number was in considerable. \. Mr Addison announced that the Convictions for drunkenness in the principal restriction-areas in England had fallen to one-half. Scotland’s figures were less satisfactory, although there had been a substantial reduction.