The approval of the Consolidated Fund Bill, to which the debate in the House of Commons on Britain's foreign policy was attached, without a division, was the best possible endorsement of Mr. Neville Chamberlain's speech, It was a timely statement and should serve to remove any misapprepensions as to where Great Britain stands vis of Europe. The points he made are quite clear. Britain will honour her military commitments with France and Belgium under the League; she will enter into no additional entanglements in Central Europe; she will adhere to the League of Nations policy of promoting collective security, but with certain improvements; regardless of what action France takes she will not intervene in the Spanish civil war; she will continue to seek a new Anglo-Italian agreement on which discussions have already begun, and in the meantime will proceed with the acceleration of her armament programme in order to be able to fulfil her commitments to other Powers, That is a most reassuring and statesmanlike declaration and should make it quite clear to the whole world exactly where Great Britain stands on subjects about which there appears to have been some degree of uncertainty. If the speech were necessary for home consumption it was even more desirable for communication to the world at large. It does not mean that Mr. Chamberlain is following a policy of peace at any price, but realizing from bitter experience that there are no winners in war, he mak it plain that there were vital issues in existence which would lead Britain to fight if they were menaced. The safety of the British Empire and its people essential, and the Prime Minister that those people would rise to any call to take action to defend themselves. There has been no change of general policy, but the assumption of an attitude necessitated by recent developments in Europe. That need not necessarily mean that the principles adopted in the past have been thrown over board—the Prime Minister makes it clear that has not been, and is not being done—but that what it is believed are but temporary realities are being faced in a realistic manner.
Mr. Attlee's contention, that the Prime Minister's speech failed to contain a note of confidence and resolution, and that the Government failed to realise the full gravity of the situation and the need for positive, not mere negative action, was to be expected from the Opposition. On the face of the reports, however, it seems that Mr. Chamberlain spoke with considerable resolution. By implication he rejects the policy suggested for months past by the Opposition which apparently desires to rush into all sorts of quarrels, and would like to see Britain intervene in Spain, and take action to preserve the integrity of Czechoslovakia. Neither of those are of vital interest to Great Britain, and, as they are not, necessitate no more action with regard to them than has already been taken. While British armaments are piling ap at a satisfactory rate, and though there is in prospect an additional acceleration the time is not yet, and never will come when the Empire will embark on all manner of quixotic adventures in Europe. British commitments are plain. They are to Belgium and France in the event of their being subjected to aggression. They will be honoured. That the Prime Minister has emphasized. Those commitments are automatic, and it is but right that such should be rigidly limited. That poses two alternatives, Should Great Britain forthwith assure France of "support in a military way if she is called upon to implement her obligations to Czechoslovakia owing to German aggression, or should she immediately declare readiness to act militarily, in resistance, in any forcible interference with the independence and integrity of the Czechoslovaks and invite other nations to associate themselves with such a declaration? Under either alternative the decision as to whether or not Britain would find herself involved in war would be automatically removed from the Government's discretion.
That as Mr. Chamberlain rightly contended was a position which the Government could not see its way to accept, and with that opinion there will be general concurrence. While it is impossible for the United Kingdom to return to a policy of isolation with regard to Europe, that is no reason whatever why the government should embark upon a policy which would inevitably lead to an extension of such entanglements as this question of Czecho: presents. The fewer the commitments Britain has in Europe the better, and the greater probability of the contribution to general peace which she i: preparing under her defence programme. The time has passed when it might have been. possible to secure peace though weakness, and it has been forcibly brought home that the only possible policy that can now be followed is one of peace through strength. That that amounts to a moral deterioration of the European situation has to be accepted with the greatest regret. There is in too many European countries a spirit of aggression abroad. So long as its activities are confined to matters which do not vitally affect British interests all that is necessary is to watch it with a wary eye and preparedness for all developments. That, Mr. Chamberlain assured the House of Commons, he is doing, and though his leadership may not be as inspired as the Opposition would like it to be, it shows every sign of being a cautious leadership and one which may steer the ship of state through the very troubled waters it is encountering. There is about the Prime Minister a sanity of outlook which seems to be missing from many of those who have recently so roundly criti-ised him, and if ever sanity were wanted in the world it is precisely at this juncture. In the circumstances it has to be admitted that Mr. Chamberlain has made a very substantial contribution to the cause of peace. There should now be no misunderstanding of Great Britain's attitude, and if it proves disappointing to some, to the majority of the British people it will undoubtedly be a great relief that while Great Britain will not be precipitated into war through any automatic application of new undertakings, she will, however, fight when she thinks it imperative. aes Real Efficiency The very successful encounter which the Municipal Police had on Thursday morning with a band of armed robbers cannot be allowed to pass without notice. So much has been heard in a certain quarter about the inefficiency of the Police that this present instance comes as very effective corroboration of this journal's contention that far from being inefficient, the Shanghai Municipal Police compare favourably with any police force in the world. In very few cities are conditions more dangerous for the police than in Shanghai, even in times of peace, but when.conditions prevail such as those in which Shanghai finds itself to-day, it is but natural that they should be even more perilous. The dispositions made by the police on arrival at the scene of the robbery were designed to deal with the gang in the most effective manner, and tribute must be paid to those who so promptly devised a scheme, as deadly as it was for the bandits without exposing the forces of law and order to more risk than was necessary for the fulfilment of their duty, It is a common sight in this city to see police search parties in bullet-proof vests quietly patrolling the streets and searching for arms. Those vests are standing tribute to the risks the wearers run in the ordinary course of their work. When they are called to the scene of armed robbery they go there fully realizing that they may be involved in such shooting affray as that which occurred on Thurs-ay. The posse behaved most gallantly and accounted for the whole of the gang. It could not have done more, and by doing what it did, it testified to the much maligned efficiency of the whole police force, and again demonstrated to Shanghai at large the excellence of its qualities.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.