Great Britain

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXVIV, Issue 67, 24 February 1916, Page 5

Great Britain

THE BLOCKADE DEBATED. ITS EFFECTIVENESS QUESTIONED A MINISTER TO TAKE .'MARGE. L'nitkt) Pi;ess Association. Londim February 22. In the House of Lords, Lord Sydenham raised the question of an effective blockade, and asked whether we were taking ftill advantage of our sea-pow-er. He contended that Britain had not brought sufficient pressure on the enemy to affect his internal conditions. Submarines had altered the methods of the blockade. The great fall n German exchange indicate.l diet Germany was buying largely in outside markets, and the real difficulty was due to this. The policy which produced the Declaration of Loudon was still alive and potent, and he urged that al commodities essential for Germany carrying on the war should he made absolute contraband. He lidiculed the idea of winning the wav oy attrition. They could only win by str king hard blows, and the war should be ended as soon as possible on terms securing the rum-recurrence of the German frenzy. He moved that in conformity with the,principles of national lav and legitimate neutral rights more effective use he made of the Allied duets to prevent essentials reaching the enemy. LORD BERESFORD,

1 Lord Charles Reresford said that if the Government had established an effective blockade at the outset he honestly believed that the wai would have been over by now. I hey had only got a sort of blockade by proclamation, and the war would imver he won by Ordcrs-in-Council. It was necessary to have a policy and turn it over to the navy to enforce. He was convinced that we would onlv he n 1 ie to win the war by an absolute blockade. Orders-in-Council might be statesmanship, but they were not war. If the fleet literally could grappie Germany by the throat it could easily smash her. The Government should finally renounce the Declaration of London, and the country should rid ’tself of the twenty-one amateur statesmen who knew nothing about war, because “amateurs” could not have any foresight. The management had been worse since the coalition. Lord Beiesforcl concluded: “We are not running the war, but the war s i mining ns.” LORD LANSDOWNE. Lord Lansdowne said that the conduct of the war was in the bands of a small committee, who were unhampered by civilians in the Cabinet. The complaints about hampering the fleet seemed to bo based o.i a misapprehension. The war bad diverted a great deal of trade into new channels, and the recousigiiment depots’ business had passed from Hamburg to Rotterdam and Copenhagen. The Government intended to put the whole blockade business in the charge of a single Minister, who would oe entrusted with the general co-ordination of these matters. The fL.Hion of goocis to the enemy through neutials ,was showing a marked tendency to dimmish, owing to the Government s measures, and there was no danger of a great leakage ’Yecurriiig It was impossible to hermetical 1 ; <ea< all channels, but wo might appeal confidently to neutrals to help us tc distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate commerce. The Government phm, whatever its faults, had accompli slit cl satisfactory results. It had billed Germany’s export trade and seiiouslj crippled her imports. He someKivi.es wished that the people of this country [could experience for one moment the [ conditions., of blits Austro-Germans and then they would realise the plight to which their adversaries had been brought. OTHER VIKWS. - Lord Loreburn said he did net beI lieve that naval pres suae would appreciably accelerate the end of the I war. There was no short cut to the [end. It was the Governments of Lurjope, not the nations, who were responsible for the beginning and the con-

I;nuance of the war, and the oniy way of avenging the immeasurable disaster (to the entire continent of Europe was by bringing tbc war to an end meni-

sci ves. : Lord Buckmaster said we certainly I will have lost if, when the war ends, it could be urged against us that we used our power to infringe neutrals legitimate rights. THE COST OF SHELLS. j BIC REDUCTION EFFECTED. ; (Received 8.2 U a.m.) | London, February 23. ! in the House of Commons, Mr Addison said the reductions made in the cost of many classes of shells had etiocted a saving of £400,000 weekly, n many instances there had boon a reduction on pre-war prices.

KITCHENER’S RESPONSIBILITY. POWERS STILL UNALTERED. (Received A. 20 a.m.) London, February 23. Speaking during tlic debate on the war credit, Mr George Lambert said Lord Kitchener’s powers were so ! whittled that he appeared to be reduced to a civilian position. He regretted that the Government had not seen lit to use Lord Fisher, who was , the greatest naval strategist of the day. | Mr Tenant refuted Mr Lambert’s statements, and said that Lord Kitchener’s responsibility had not been altered. SHAKESPEARIAN CENTENARY. V.J FESTIVAL OF MERCY IN AID OF BELGIAN RELIEF. (Received 8.20 a.m.) London, February 23. Tlie tercentenary of Shakespeare

will be celebrated by a Festival of Mercy in April and May. Every inhabitant of Empire is asked to wear a medallion, the profits from the sale of which will go to the Red Cross League of Mercy for Belgian Relief.