Mr. Chamberlain's reply undoubtedly impressed the House. His warning to
Germany was universally welcomed, and the majority of members, even on his own side, seemed to approve his declaration that, so long as there were foreign troops in Spain and so long as no other solution had been found but that involved in the Non-Intervention Plan, the Government did not propose to grant belligerent rights otherwise than in accordance with the Plan itself. Mr. Vernon Bartlett, however, was not entirely reassured. He feared that the threat of belligerent rights might be employed to compel the Spanish Government to accept an armistice. Sir Archibald. Sinclair made effective use of quotations from Man Kampf, and Mr. Lloyd George was scathing about the Prime Minister's powers as a sprinter. Sir John Simon wound up for the Government with a typical speech. He is, as one would expect, adept at picking holes in his opponents' argument. He frequently scores, but scarcely ever convinces anyone whose mind is not already made up. It is easy to rouse cheers by demanding to know what the critics would have done at the time of the Munich Conference. But the Opposition's case against Mr. Chamberlain is that he should nevei have arrived at the situation in which he then found himself; this contention Sir John scarcely attempted to meet. However, he made his own views abundantly clear. It is his opinion that " the first reason why we may defend the Agreement of Munich is that the Agreement of Munich was right."
* * * *
Previous page
