20 J.-A. PEMBERTON
International Relations and Social Sciences Service of the IIIC was also
the ISC’s secretary, observed in Population and Peace the following: that
the presumption that Hoare’s proposal in regard to the distribution of
raw materials was an ‘“official pronouncement” by Great Britain on the
subject of “the prevailing discontent,”’ as it was described in a submis-
sion to the 1937 conference ISC by the RIIA and by which was meant
an official pronouncement on the colonial claims of the dissatisfied pow-
ers, was ‘perhaps warranted in fact, but perhaps not warranted in fact.’^65
As we have seen, far from making a pronouncement on the grievances
of the colonial have-nots, Hoare had proposed that a commission of
inquiry be established whose terms of reference would include an inves-
tigation of the factual basis of these grievances and, as we have also seen,
had insisted that this commission of inquiry would only be established
once all threats of war had ceased. In light of this and assuming for the
moment that the government of Britain was in fact willing to consider
it, it was hardly to be expected that the British government would have
given any consideration to the question of how to redistribute British
imperial resources prior to Hoare’s speech. Further to this, it should be
recalled that Hoare had stressed in his speech at the Sixteenth Assembly
that what he proposed was a collective attempt to deal with a problem
which he framed, notably, as a fear of monopoly of essential raw materials
rather than as unfulfilled territorial aspirations. The qualified nature of
Hoare’s proposal was reaffirmed by Anthony Eden, Hoare’s replacement
as foreign secretary following Hoare’s resignation from the position, in
the House of Commons on February 24, 1936. After having reaffirmed
the British government’s support for the LON and, more specifically, for
Article 16 of the covenant, Eden stated the following:
The other matter to which I want to make reference is the question of
access to Colonial raw materials, which were more recently discussed in
this House. I must make it clear that His Majesty’s Government have in
no way withdrawn from the proposal of my right hon. Friend the Member
for Chelsea (Sir S. Hoare) on this subject. They are perfectly willing at
any time to enter into an examination of this subject, and they think that
such an examination could usefully be held at Geneva. The appropriate
moment, however, for such an examination must clearly depend on many(^65) Chalmers Wright, ed., Population and Peace: A Survey on International Opinion on
Claims for Relief from Population Pressure, 25n.