Evening Post. TUESDAY, MAY 8, 1923. THE STORMY RUHR

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 108, 8 May 1923, Page 6

Evening Post. TUESDAY, MAY 8, 1923. THE STORMY RUHR

The sky continues overcast in the Ruhr. If Lord Curzon has hitherto done little more than predict better weather, he has at least the excuse of the meteorologist—that he cannot make the weather better, nor can he always be right in his predictions. There are some authorities, of varying standards of judgment, who have held that Lord Curzon has not this excuse, and that he could shift the clouds if he allowed a breeze of British opinion to stir the air. General Smuts has said it is time to act, the Liberals and Labour members have said so, " The Times " and " The Spectator " have said so. But it is to be noted that the higher and better informed the authority that speaks the lees positive is the advice that it offers. Except for the proposal to refer the whole problem to the League of Nations, which proposal was rejected by the British House of Commons, there has been no definite line of action suggested. In passing, it may be stated that reference to the League of Nations would be at best the beginning of another problem if France resisted the step (as appears cei'tain at present) and opposed the admission of Germany to the League. Yet British opinion is becoming more impatient of inaction. A month ago " The Spectator," writing of anticipated German proposals for settlement of reparations by an external Commission, stated : Of course, the wise policy would be for the Allies to take Germany at her word, and thus reach a final settlement almost at once. But with France in her present state of mind, and with opinion here and in America still divided between loyalty to an Ally whom they saved and to a world which they may ruin by .their inaction., this is obviously asking for the moon. At any rate, we sincerely hope that the British and American Governments will examine the German proposals, if and when they arrive, coldly .and calmly on their merits as an economic settlement, and will then reflect on the interests of their own people and not on the alleged interests of fhelr late Ally. From " The Spectator," which has never been a journal to shout with the crowd (no matter which crowd), this is plain speaking. It may be compared with the opinion expressed in the early stages of the occupation, and will serve as an illustration of the growing British unrest. British opinion generally regarded the occupation at first as mistaken,, but hoped that it would be proved otherwise. The continuation and intensification of the occupation policy are rapidly causing it to be viewed as disastrous. French methods of dealing with the German Note will not allay that feeling. We may admit that the German Note proposed an inadequate settlement, and that the offer of a total sum of £1,500,000,000 could scarcely prove acceptable to France, which rejected Mr. Bonar Law's proposal of £2,500,000,000 in January. We may admit further that the Germans were unfortunate (to state it mildly) in their references to the evacuation of the Ruhr and the " high-handed seizure of pledges and sanctions." German diplomacy, however, has never been distinguished for delicate handling of difficult situations, and Germans are, Germans still. Yet even the worthlessness of the Note as a basis for negotiation and ultimate settlement does not excuse the French haste in rejecting it, or the method of rejection. While .Prance was sending . a brief reply to Belgium for final approval, Lord Curzon was telling j the Primrose League that the Government was in close communication with the French, the Belgians, and the other Allies. If Germany (he said) were confronted with the views, decisions, and actions of all the principal Powers concerned, the chances of success would be greatly increased. This sentence had a twofold meaning. It was a.warning to Germany not to expect to profit by division of the Allied Powers; but it was also an invitation to France to regulate her action so that Germany might be faced with a united front. France did not wholly ignore this invitation. She decided to let the; Allies have the reply before the Germans received it; but no opportunity was afforded for effective criticism of its terms. The excuse is but a poor one when considered as a reason for not presenting a collective reply. France, it is stated, would have preferred I a collective reply, " but that was j impossible, owing to the demand of the French public and Parlia- j mentary opinion for the immediate I rejection of the German Note." j When French opinion, as inter-1 preted by French statesmen, will j not brook a few days' delay so as j to maintain an appearance of solidarity, there is some reason for regarding with scepticism the assurance given by France that if Germany at any time makes an offer which can possibly be regarded as a basis for discussion, M. Pqincare will be prepared to consider it jointly with all the Allies,

! It is reported by "The Ob- ■ server " that Britain is pointing ; out in the friendliest way that the general problem of reparations and inter-Allied debts is one which does not concern France -- alone. Yet France, in her reply to Germany, has stated definite conditions which may not be acceptable to her Allies. What is Britain to do and what is America to do 1? They also have received the Note from Germany. Are they to send replies which simply say: " Hear! hear!" to the reply rushed in by France, or are they to express their own opinions (as Franca has done) without regard to the opinions of other Allied nations, or are they to send replies of vague, meaningless phrases? It does appear that the time is coming when Britain and America must speak if they are not to hold their peace for ever. If they are to speak and be heard, it seems imperative that they should speak together. The late Walter Page, American Ambassador to Britain during the war, wrote, not long after the outbreak of war:

As Qic world stand*, the United States and Great Britain must work together and stand together to keep the predatory nations in order. ... I frankly tell my friends here that the English have got to throw away their damned arrogance and their insularity, and that we Americans have get to throw away our provincial ignorance. The world stands to-day in peril of disaster almost as great as it faced when Mr. Page wrote. If Mr. Page were alive to-day, he would probably make the same plea for united action, and he might repeat a sentence he wrote when he urged America's entry into the. fight: " There can be no historic approval of neutrality for years while the world is bleeding to death."