The Dictatorship of France.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 17983, 29 January 1924, Page 6

The Dictatorship of France.

It is a curious coincidence that one of our cable messages this morning should predict an Anglo-American-German Entente, "as a result of France's lack "of judgment," and another announce. the signing, of a Pranco-Czecho-Slovakian Treaty "to form part of a " series of similar agreements ... to " consolidate political and juridical " order." The second, an international fact, means of course that Prance has taken another step towards the permanent disruption of Germany and the military dictatorship of Europe. It proves that the Entento means far less to her now than the Little Entente; that her hope is no longer in Britain, but in Poland and Czecho-Slovakia and whatever other States she can detach from Germany. The Treaty now praised as "inspired by the principle " laid down by the League of Na- " tions" has been more than once foretold in recent months and as often officially denied. It has been denied also that there was any significance in the visits -which M. Berenger, Senator and personal friend of M. Poincare, made in November last to Poland and the States of the Little Entente, and the denial had precisely the same value.as the official repudiation of the CzechoSlovakian Treaty. It had no value at all. Everyone who can see and think

knows that France is "working dili-

gently to form a Central European bloc in close military and political alliance with herself. At the present time this is not directed against Britain, and if good luck attends Prance in her German policy it never will be; but if you do quarrel with your friends, the bludgeon yon. prepared for the burglar is a handy weapon to have lying by. And against this fact of the second cable message, of vrhat value is the hope of the first? An Anglo-American-German Entente is'not the kind of defence we like at present to think about. .Everyone must hope that it will never be a necessity, if there are some bold enough to believe that it is a possibility. All that we need say is that it will never be one or the other if France is reasonable. Britain wants no Entente with Germany, and will seek no alliance with any Power while her neighbours keep the peace. But it grows more and more clear that the chief hope of peace is an understanding between the two Powers which are at once the strongest and the most pacific. An offensive and defensive alliance between the two great groups of the English-speaking world is not practicable. No formal association of any kind can be regarded as practicable while the feeling of America remains what it is to "entangling Euro- " pean alliances." Yet a European bloc threatening the peace of the world would compel, and is already compelling, the Anglo-Saxon nations to.realise that civilisation is becoming an English trust. Unless Franco can. develop a saner notion of security than one involving the destruction in advance of potential rivals and foes America will be compelled to join Britain, as she has once joined her already, to protect her own liberty. And in the 'meantime it is an encouraging fact that the ties between the nations are being steadily strengthened. War with France is an almost unthinkable horror, but the surest safeguard against it is the development of such feelings as were expressed at the farewoll dinner in Washington last week to Sir Auckland Geddes. It is extremely pleasing also, and cheering, that almost the last words spoken in America by Mr Massey were these:

/'The great duty of the British Empire is to promote peace. It has endeavoured to do so in the past, and I hope it will continue to do so. I look forward to a day when the United States will join with the British Empire in safeguarding the peace of the world. It will be a wonderful thing for civilisation if we can have a league of English-speaking peoples.''

We do not know whether the good citizens are numerous enough in Christchurcli, and brave enough, to concert the "Keep to the Left" by-law into a reality. But we hope they are. The proposals adopted by the Council last night as aids will certainly help, but the only real hope is in the intelligence and will of the people. We urge every earnest citizen, busy or not busy, assertive or meek and mild, to make an effort from February the 7th to remove the Teproach from Christchurch that it is the least reasonable city in the Dominion. To keep to the left at present seems almost impossible, and will still seem impossible on the 7th. But unless those who have a conscience will make the attempt, and keep on making it, whatever delays it involves, and whatever recriminations, the chalklines and sandwich-men will have very little effect. Even the police, we imagine, will find it beyond them to control the foolish if they do not haive the assistance of the less foolish.

The Board of Governors of Canterbury College did well yesterday' to protest against the proposal of the Education Department to have all school buildings designed by a Government architect. Just how the Department's intention would work out in practice is not quite clear, since the members of the Board did not seem to have enough information before them to make plain tD them exactly what centralisation would mean. But the general intention of the Department is quite clear, and quite dangerous. t There is the fact, to begin with, that private practice is more remunerative and less hampered than professional service for the Government, and tends therefore to be more efficient. It is no reflection on anybody to say that the best architects qf the Dominion are not likely in any given year to bo State' servants. And in the second place the Department certainly is afflicted at present with a mania for centralisation—a mania that is, at best, the tion and distortion of a goo<l enough principle. If we agree with Mr Brock that the new architectural aim is simply economy and efficiency, tha.t is an aim which will be realised only if the Department contents itself with laying down a few broad principles, and leaving their to local specialists. I

By two votes the other day the homerulers of Hobart reduced their Governor's salary by £1 to show their disapproval of imported representatives of the King. But in the meantime no one will' suffer. Tasmania has had no Governor for many months, and seemed so far from getting one when our last exchanges left Hobart that the Chief Justice had given formal notice of a strike unless the Government bestirred itself and made a speedy new arrangement. It is, however, one of those situations in which procrastination pay 3. In 1919-20 Government House cost the community £slßl, and in 192021, the last period for which there is an available return, the cost was £3OO greater. But the cost, in all, of an Administrator, is quite £ISOO less than this, a consideration to a State which has openly confessed to bankruptcy. Nor is it clear that the appointment of a home-grown Governor would make much difference in the financial situation. The problem is not one of origin but of banking accounts: what Tasmania has to find is a man with so much money of his own that he is prepared, not only to save nothing, but to contribute about a thousand a year to the community for the privilege of being his Excellency, and men of that type aro not found freely anywhere.

It is a standing complaint of '-'plain people'- that Parliament is controlled Sy lawyers. In Britain, however, at the present time the number of lawvers in the Commons is neither so largo as it used to be, nor so large as most people thought it \vas going to bo when the candidates were first announced. A scrutiny of the nominations gave a rough first count of 200 lawyer candidates, -which was reduced to 140 beforo the poll was actually taken; and of those 140, only 75 were elected. It appears, too, that of the 75 more than 50 sat in the last House, so that only about 20 are new members, while quite 20 old members were defeated. It is to be noted, further, that of the 75 elected 40 are Conservatives, 30 Liberals, and five only representatives of Labour, which indicates either that Labour does not like Law, or that Law has no lovo for Labour. If, however, the second is the case, Law is very ungrateful, since these are its certain rewards—the Lord Chancellor's £IO,OOO, tho Attorney-General's £7OOO and pickings the "Solicitor-General's £6OOO and what he can make in addition —all the plums, in fact, that are bigger than the Prime Minister's.