THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17732, 7 April 1923, Page 15

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

I . is IT A SUCCESS ? IXOYD GEORGE PESSIMISTIC. (The following and all Lloyd ■ George articles copriglu by United press of America in ail countries, copyright in Australasia by Australian Press, copyright in Britain bv "Daily Chronicle." Reproduction in full or in part, prohibited.] M (ÜBtB—PBESS ASSOCIATION—COrTRICIHT.) (ArmAUAH AND II I. CABLE ASSOCIATION.) (Received April 6th, 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, April 4. ' ' Mr Lloyd George's -fifteenth article the League of Nations and its diances of achieving the purpose for gbioh it was constituted. He asks : It tba League of Nations a success!' Jt ie impossible to answer candidly without giving ofienee to the rh at parjjjjas, I mean, nevertheless, to atfettipt en answer, for much depends on » fiarlees examination of the progress B«ie or missed. The Leajue was fptmded three years ago. This is much too short a period to afford a test of tie working of a gigantic, complex, but T<) ry delicate and sensitive human maeiiDe. The League, however, has been Jjfc enough in existence to reveal its ijjjflfflgtb, its weakennesses, its poteu- ' jj»litiee and its perils. It has already Ifftiaved triumphs of which its foundgjj jjmy well be proud, notably the re- , nation of Austria, and the stamping <flrt of typhus and preventing its spread W&tffWd- The labour branch is also producing marked and important rehKs< Ol'eat credit ia due to the letgw for alleviating distress in the Ifjujjce-atrickeii areas in Europe, and imong the refugees from the horrors of Bolshevism and Turkish savagery in Minor, 'but these humanitarian tagltt were not the primary objects of ttui League's foundation. Its main pippins was averting future wars. It# failure or success as an experijfllßt •hould.be judged by this test ifczw. How does it stand ia this rei tptet? It succeeded in averting a fyflijaroUfl depute between Sweden and Rnlend over the Asiand Islands. Here tilt methods gave confidence 'i» its complete impartiality. This canSDt bo Bftid, unfortunately, of the Bil--0i«B award which, although acted " spoil, hardly accepted by both par#et as a fair settlement, Instead of following ,the Aaiand precedent in the choice of a tribunal, the League pur- • iMd a couwe which engendered suspio- • ion «nd intrigue in the choice of a tril the conduot of proceedings, pjn the Aal«pd case no Great Power 1 fc-lfis particularly interested in influeno- • | a decision'. Here two Great PowI, prs, and Poland, with authority ■" felu the league were passionately en- | p»ged securing a result adverse to Ger- | the other party to the dispute. |r if She had no frienda and, moreover, was »; I jjpt a member of the Great. ° I" Britain stood for fairplay, but was not t protagonist of German .clajms. In j r these circumstances the League ought \ to have eaeroised wore isoruploiis care »»g to freedom from bias. Had it i yibfosen distinguished jurists from outits own body., all would hove teen pll. The way Poland flouted the Ijaague overVilna served to confirm I ike idea prevailing in Russia that rod Poland dominate the The Silesian award may be ifr will take a long series of which *J» beyond cavil to liCleru>au and Euwian coniithd League. The Vilna fiasco, failure, the suspicions Bg the Sileeiao. award, We which prevents it tackrktions which is the one que#IPbtog Europe's peace to-day, I conversations and commltlisarmament, which everyone [not succeed in scrapping one tsroplanes or company of m- ! 1 these disappointment# arise predominating cause. Mt weakness of the Xieagua m the fact that it represents half of the Great Powers of , The League to be a reality Went the whole of the civilisThat is the original concepasb why that failed is to propter, barren controversy. . 1 ropose to express an opinion srite of the manoeuvres which be defeat of the Treaty in Whether tho Senate should toured the signature of the President given in the name intry at an International Conjr whether commitment was imtotaily at variance with ideas to justify sanction, the amendments demanded as on of approval would havo he League and ought to have Kited, or whether they were and ought to have been ac--6 issues whioh it would not Iteful purpose to discuss. M o the American refusal i to the League, there is no 3d it of all chonco of dom■s. It is true three Oreat t Britain, i'ranee and ed. The effect has been Where these three Powon important issues, no- ). No two Great Powers ihe responsibility of overture!, Jtience reparations en dealt with by the I America been in, even ided and expurgated con- » situation would have med. America and Great g in concert with an openo Italy and a secretly aSim, would have brought on Franoe as to make it it the League should act. wer has so far permitted onal quesion in which it interest to be submitted ie for decision. France clines to submit to the wute threatening quarrel oken. out with Germany, jace's refusal has had the blin" the and 80 ittitude is maintained, the be impotent to discharge ution, restoring and keopnpossible that tho repawn may end in the most conflict that even broke* i. It is churning up de. dIf ever there was an oo-iffl-vention by ah organisaor the purpose, surely this A foot of next column.)

is pre-eminently such a case. Franco not only declines to put the League Covenant into operation, but intiiliotes that she will treat any such proposal as nn unfriendly act. The constitution of the League stipulates it ia the friendly duty of any Power to move that any international dispute, which, threatens tho peace shall be referred to the League. Nevertheless, one of the leading signatory rules out of the Covenant all questions vitally affecting its own interests. This is the Power which invaded the territory of another because the latter failed to carry out one of tbe Treaty provisions. This emphatic repudiation of a solemn contract has been acquiesced in by the other signatories. This limitation of tlio League's activities is the gravest check it has yet sustained in it« career. 1 do not believe it would have occurred if America, with or without Clause X., had been an active member. A rational settlement of the reparations question by the League would' have established its' authority throughout the world, Germany, Russia, and Turkey, who now treat its deliberations with distrust tinctured with contempt, would bo forced to respect its power and would soon be pleading for incorporation in its coxincils. Argument, debate, and intercession would be the recognised substitutes for shot, shell, and sword!. Waxs would cease and the reign of law would bo supreme. The League, by developing the habit of nations debating their differences in the presence of the world is gradually edging out war as the settler of quarrels. Will it be allowed to render that service? If not, it will perish like many other laudable experiments. If it dies, the hope of establishing peao® on eai ;h will bo buried in its tomib