PROOF OF CONSPIRACY

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 295, 5 March 1928, Page 9

PROOF OF CONSPIRACY

Two Copies of Zinovieff Letter MR. RAMSAY MacDONALD’S REPLY By Cable.—Press Association. —Copyright THE Leader of the Labour Party. Mr. Kaiusay Macdonald. in a statement in reply to Mr. Thomas Marlowe, formerly editor of the ‘‘Daily Mail,” says that the receipt of two copies of the Zinovieff letter from friends was perfectly conclusive that a conspiracy existed for the use of the letter for political purposes in connection with the 1924 election.

“The fact that the letters differed,” he says, “shows that there must have been two originals or two sets of people copying the original letter, the existence of which was not proved, because nobody had seen it. “Mr. Marlowe's references to my conversations regarding Mr. W. D. Gregory are absolutely untrue. Moreover, it is now clear that the 'Daily Malls’ threats of publication forced the hands of a Foreign Office official during my absence, resulting in the sending of the note to Rakovskv and the publishing of the note without my knowledge. “The ‘Daily Mail's” excuse is that I believed in suppressing the Zinovieff letter owing to the fear of its influence on the election. Lord Crewe assumed that the publication of the note to Rakovskv could have stopped the attack. “That would not have suited the purposes of those who had made up their minds that the Labourites must be defeated by hook or by crook. Therefore I must point out that the Treasury inquiry proved that members of the Foreign Office were not convinced of the authenticity of the letter. In any event it was the Foreign Secretary who should have been convinced of this. 0 "Furthermore, it is now clear that there was a knowledge of the letter outside the Foreign Office, and that knowledge was used dishonestly to stampede the public against the Government. “I warmly repudiate Mr. Marlowe's implication that I was able to receive the Government departments' confidential documents and use them for political purposes. I think the officals of the Foreign Office erred in their judgment, and I still cannot understand how I, although at the end of a telephone, was not informed for six hours of the ‘Daily Mail's intentions, and that the Foreign Office was sending a note to Rakovsky.” Mr. MacDonald added: Mr. Marlowe’s letter is a confession that the origin of the Zinovieff letter was probably a fake. Its use was certainly a fraud, therefore the publication renders an inquiry more essential. Mr. J. H. Thomas, M.P., speaking at Darlington, said: “We are asking Parliament how people were hawking the Zinovieff letter about, how they were able to take it to the ‘Daily Mail’ office when it ought not to have left the Foreign Office. We believe that every decent-minded Briton will support us in the interests of the purity of public life.” The "Observer” publishes a lengthy letter from Mr. Thomas Marlowe, formerly editor of the "Daily Mall,” to the effect that he had two copies of the Zinovieff letter in his possession on October 24, 1924, both from friends. He circulated reprints to other newspapers, with an intimation that their authenticity could be established at the Foreign Office and elsewhere. He adds: "I have never seen Mr. Gregory, and I did not pay him or any other person £5,000, or any sum, for the letter. It did not cost me a single penny.” The Foreign Under-Secretary, hearing what had happened in Fleet Street, decided it would be better for the letter to be published with a draft of Mr. MacDonald’s reply to Rakowsky. The writer says he believes this was a right decision. He thinks that if Mr. MacDonald had taken the public into his confidence the letter would have done him little, if any, harm. Mr. Marlowe expresses the opinion that but for his action Mr. MacDonald would have succeeded in delaying its publication until after the election. He adds: "Mr. MacDonald, instead of blaming himself, continued unjustly to suspect Mr. Gregory of treacherously springing a mine under his feet. It is now clear he was not responsible.”—A. and N.Z.-Sun.

GHOST OF ZINOVIEFF MACDONALD DETERMINED TO EXPOSE FRAUD By Cable. — Press Association. — Copyright. LONDON, Sunday. “They thought we had buried Zinovieff, but lo and behold, hi* ghost has arisen and is going to haunt us in the House of Commons in the next fortnight,** said Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, leader of the Labour Party, in a speech at Briton Ferry. ‘•T DOUBT even then if it will be A laid,” he went on. “Certain important papers are being sent to mo, on which we must take action.” “You will recall the terrible weekend of the Zinovieff letter. You will remember it was characterised as a fraud. I have never said whether the evidence convinced me that the letter itself was not a forgery, because I was not interested as to that. What I am interested in, is the fraudulent, use made of it by the Conservatives and the ‘Daily Mail.* “Until that has been answered, we will not rest. I shall keep at it until the fraud has been exposted a id the British people realise the conditions under which they voted in 1924.” The case of Mr. J. D. Gregory, the dismissed Foreign Office official, the Zinovieff letter and the allegation of the manipulation of its publication, are featured in the Sunday papers. Viscount Castlerosse, writing in the “Sunday Express,” says: “Mr. Gregory was told by the Permanent Un-der-Secretary to the Foreign Office, the late Sir Eyre Crowe, that the Labourites were making accusations against him. He did not take the matter seriously, but was advised to see Mr. MacDonald and Mr. J. H. Thomas. This Mr. Gregory did. Mr. MacDonald refused to discuss the matter, and they parted bad friends. Mr. Thomas discussed the Zinovieff letter.