BRITAIN AND GERMANY

Waikato Times, Volume 125, Issue 20990, 18 December 1939, Page 7

BRITAIN AND GERMANY

NOTE FROM URUGUAY NEUTRALITY VIOLATED (United Press Assn.—Elec. Tel. Copyright) MONTEVIDEO, Dec. 16 Uruguay has sent Britain and Germany Notes protesting against their ships having fought within the mouth of the River Plate. The Notes state that, although the River Plate is over three miles wide, Argentina and Uruguay consider the entire width constitutes their jurisdictional waters. The Notes also allege that the warships at one time were exchanging shots within the three-mile limit. A further protest is made against the battle having taken place within the “neutral zone” of 300 miles from the coast, which was established at the recent Panama conference. Thrilling Diplomatic Victory If the secrecy shrouding the Uruguayan Foreign Office could be penetrated, it would probably reveal a battle as thrilling diplomatically as that of Wednesday was militarily, says a message from Montevideo. While Britain and France are reported to have continued to strengthen their forces at the mouth of the River Plate and the Admiral Graf Spee’s crew feverishly continued the repairs to their ship, the Foreign Ministers of the South American republics were equally busy trying to prepare against the situation Uruguay is facing as the result of the Admiral Graf Spee’s entry.

The busiest man has been the Uruguayan Foreign Minister, Senor Alberto Guani, whose time has been divided between the delicate diplomatic situation with Britain and discussions regarding joint action to protect South American neutrality. Prevention of Repetition

The measures the South American republics are studying to prevent a repetition of the Graf Spee incident include the adoption of uniform legislation providing for the immediate internment of any belligerent warships entering a neutral port. This is at present the law in Brazil. Uruguay’s protest to Britain and Germany alleging that part of the battle took place within the jurisdictional waters of the River Plate has convinced the South American republics that the protection of their neutrality will require something stronger than resolutions. i The feeling is growing that the j Admiral Graf Spee took refuge to | escape a tactical disadvantage in the battle rather than because she was in danger of sinking. Position Under Hague Convention When the entry of the Admiral Graf Spee into Uruguayan waters ! before the pursuing British cruisers ! became known in London, the British Government, in accordance with normal usage, advised the British I Minister in Montevideo of its views jof the position under the Hague | Convention of 1907, and the Min- ! ister, Mr E. Millington-Drake, took the first convenient opportunity to j acquaint the Uruguayan Government i with these views. i There was no cause for or question of formal representations, nor, on i the other hand, is anything known j in official circles in London of the ; reported representations by Uruguay j to the British Government. DISTINGUISHED PART HON. A. HAMILTON’S COMMENT (By Telegraph.—Press Association) INVERCARGILL, Saturday “ Although the news of the naval engagement in the South Atlantic, in I which the New Zealand cruiser j Achilles played such a distinguished i part, may cause anxiety in some New Zealand homes, all New Zealanders will feel proud of the heroism and daring of the ship and men against such a formidable foe,” said the , Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. A. Hamilton. “ New Zealand owes its very existence to the British Navy, and it fills us with pride to learn of the encounter that adds further lustre to the Navy’s already glorious traditions.”

By special arrangements Reuter’s World ' Service. In addition to other special sources i of information, is used in the compilation | of the overseas intelligence published in , tli:- issue, and all rights therein in Aus--1 tralia and New Zealand are reserved, such i t »r the cable news in this issue as is so j headed has appeared in the Times and is ; so sent to this paper by special permis- | sion. It should be understood that the j opinion is not that of the Times unless li j is expressly stated Is k »o.