The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. FRIDAY, FEBRUARYS 26, 1926. LEAGUE AND COUNCIL.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 48, 26 February 1926, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARYS 26, 1926. LEAGUE AND COUNCIL.

For the cause thai lacks assistance. For the wrong, that needs resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that tee can do.

J The office of British Foreign Minister | carries with it high dignity and authority, but also a corresponding weight of responsibility, and no one need envy Sir A. Chamberlain the duties that just now fall to his lot. On the one hand he has to maintain a friendly and "correct" attitude toward Germany and France and Italy and a host of minor States and Powers at once; on the other he has to tatisfy political opponents in Parliament and throughout the country that neither he nor the Government of which he is a member lias done or contemplates doing anything which the majority of the electors would be. likely to condemn. It says a great deal for our Foreign Minister's honesty and courage, as well as for his political adroitness, that so far he has suceeded so well in his difficult task. But human nature being what it is, Ministers can always depend upon the Opposition attempting to make capital out of the difficulties of the Government of the day; and question-time in the Lower House under such circumstances is, of necessity, a somewhat painful ordeal. On the whole. Sir A. Chamberlain <md his colleagues may fairly be. congratulated on their emergence from this week's deluge of criticism without serious damage to their political prospects or their reputations. One obvious reason for the ease and success with which the Foreign Minister has evaded the onslaughts of his opponents is. of course, the general knowledge that such attacks are for the most part natural and inevitable incidents of party warfare. When Mr. Arthur Ponsonby rose in the Lower House to engage once more in his favourite amusement of heckling and baiting the Government, and when Lord Parmoor moved his rather portentous resolution in the House of Lords, we can imagine that the majority of members present philosophically sat back and accepted everything that was said about the faults of omission or commission attributed to Ministers as "all in the day's I work." As a matter of fact, there was jso little that was really substantial or I telling in the imputations and insinua- ■ tions advanced that the Minister had ja comparatively easy task in replying, j Mr. Ponsonby. speaking for Labour, was (particularly anxious to know if the i Foreign Office or the Cabinet had eomimitted itself unduly in regard to the admission of Germany to the Council of the League or the exclusion of other States. Sir A. Chamberlain gave the j required assurance, but he added —in ! terms which suggested the line of argument that he followed the day before at Birmingham—that when the Powers at Locarno agreed to accept Germany, tbey did not bind themselves to oppose all other candidates. The point made here and in the Birmingham speech was in part the text for Lord- Parmoor's resolution. For he urged not only that it is undesirable to raise the question of enlarging the Council just now, but that under no circumstances should the constitution of the Council be altered with any intention of serving the purpose of international politics, or maintaining a European Balance of Power.

* In justice to Lord Parmoor, it mustj be admitted that,. while - Lis - vehement prejudices lay his remarks open, to the charge of political partizanship, • the question that lie raises here is one of grave international importance. It would be an irreparable disaster for the League of Nations if once the Assembly or the Council became the scene of international rivalries, and the lofty purposes and ideals which, inspired its institution were obscured by sordid political intrigues. But it does not follow that any attempt to modify the existing constitution of the Council is, of necessity, a step in that direction. Lord Phillimore is so much afraid "of these possible dangers that he declares himself opposed to any enlargement of the Council, protesting that it should not be transformed into a "cockpit" for opposing national interests. Behind all this is, of course, the suspicion to which certain classes of British politicians seem singularly prone, that there is some'dark and devious intrigue in progress, and that France must be at the bottom of it. Without mentioning France, Lord Cecil, replying to Lord Parmoor, assured the House that the question of increasing the Council had not been raised by the proposal to admit Germany. It had been discussed frequently Ibefore, and had been deferred only to avoid hurting the susceptibilities of Germany and her friends. But as Sir A. Chamberlain has already argued, it is absurd to contend that so small a Council is large enough to "speak for the moral judgment of the world," or to manage international affairs. And when this "storm in a teacup has subsided, no doubt the great majority of people not committed to the duties and tasks of an Opposition will be found to share his views.