Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1923. FOREIGN POLICY AND THE ELECTION

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 141, 12 December 1923, Page 4

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1923. FOREIGN POLICY AND THE ELECTION

The one British Minister who remained at his post while all Mb colleagues were flying about the country electioneering was Lord Curzon. It was fortunate for the nation that, while Mr. Baldwin was aggravating the difficulties and the perils of the international position by the domestic crisis which he had precipitated, the Foreign Office was still able to attend to " business as usual." Among all the anomalies in which the government of the British Empire abounds, and in which some of its blind admirers profess to glory, thsre is perhaps none more unbusinesslike,, more absurd, or more perilous than that which subjects the control of its foreign policy to a Cabinet dependent upon the accidents of party politics in a; single one of its component States, and chosen as a rule upon entirely irrelevant considerations. It would be comforting to find in the Foreign Minister's attention to business during one of the most strenuous of election campaigns an indication that his officfe has been elevated to a higher * plane than that of party politics. But it is probable that such a delusion is not entertained by even the most ignorant of foreign Governments. The danger of the anomaly to which we have referred was mitigated on this occasion by another anomaly which the thoroughgoing democrat is sometimes tempted to denounce as equally dangerous. As -a hereditary legislator whose political existence is not completely dependent on the chances of a popular election, Lord Curzon could stick to his post at the Foreign Office with a fidelity that might have spelled political suicide for a commoner.

But the security which Lord Curzon enjoys as a hereditary legislator of course does not extend to him in the capacity of Foreign Minister. He is still a legislator, b"ut the condemnation of his party's domestic policy at the polls will involve his ejectment from the Foreign Office, Yet, if any opinion at all on foreign policy can be extracted from a confused verdict which was almost entirely dictated by Free Trade, the capital levy, and other domestic issues, it was certainly not adverse to Lord Curzon's work at the Foreign Office. If, by any chance, he was given the same portfolio in a reconstructed @abinet of any kind, his hands would not be weakened but strengthened by the electors' decision. He would be free to pursue his own line in regard to France with i less embarrassment from the "Die-hards" of his own party than before. "M. Poincare, as well as Mr. Baldwin," says the "New York World," "has been beaten in the British elections." There is certainly no ground for saying that Lord Curzon has been beaten.

The first impressions of Paris were the same as those of New York. "The French," says the Paris correspondent of "The Times," "were at first greatly shocked by the result of the Bri-. tish elections,' in ,view of' the probable change of policy in regard to the reparations question." Nothing is said by this authority to show that on this point the second thoughts of the French are any more cheerful than the first. The present Parliament is clearly less favourable to the claims of France than its predecessor was, and it is wholesome that she should recognise the fact. But the strength of the popular opposition to French policy in the Ruhr may nevertheless receive a feebler expression than before \jnleaa a Government -.caab.elQjriaed.which is not haunted

by the constant fear of a Parliamentary defeat. It is not, however, upon the instability of the political position but on the defeat of Tariff Reform that the French appear to be basing their less unfavourable view of the result of the General Election

The French now see says "The Times" correspondent, that the outcome of the elections is the destruction of the formidable tariff menace, and are beginning to congratulate themselves, since it is argued that if Mr. Baldwin had won he would have had a powerful weapon which might.,have been directed against France.

It is to be hoped that even the most sanguine supporters of Tariff Reform may find here some compensation for the defeat which the cause has sustained at the hands of the British electors. Ultimately Protection may do much for Britain, and preference may do much for the Empire, but the benefits immediately derivable from either of these policies would surely be trifling in comparison with the addition which the outbreak of a tariff war between Britain and France would make to their present troubles. Between nations, as between parties, differences about tariffs are apt to excite very bad feeling, and what might ultimately have provided a valuable cement for the Empire would possibly have completed the ruin of the Entente. The rejoicing over the escape of both countries from "the possibility of a fierce economic battle" should not be confined to France, nor even in the Dominions should it.be entirely eclipsed by disappointment over the failure of a policy upon which they have been building hopes. Their sentiments and their expectations on this point have undoubtedly been exaggerated by their representatives at the Economic Conference, and no responsible authority in New Zealand would care to join the Melbourne "Age" in charging the Mother Country with having "again slammed the door in the face of the Dominions." She is still doing at least a hundred times as much for us as we are doing for her, and even when she disappoints us, justice, self-respect, and a sense of humour should combine to restrain us from melodramatic exaggeration.