Evening Post. FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1925. DIVIDED OPINIONS

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 51, 28 August 1925, Page 6

Evening Post. FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1925. DIVIDED OPINIONS

In view of the extraordinary differences in the London Press, it would be rash even for the bestinformed authority on this side of the world to express any confident judgment on the terms of the British Government's offer for the settlement of the French War Debt. The generosity of the offer has surprised everybody, but there the unanimity ends. "No debtor in the world's history ever has been so well treated," says the " Daily News/ but though it rarely has a good word to say for the Government, and does not often miss the chance of attacking Mr. Churchill, it is quite satisfied that on this occasion they took the right course. It is plainly from the standpoint of international goodwill that the philanthropy of the " Daily News " deems tha heavy financial sacrifice worth while. The " Daily Express," on the other hand, which,has recently been assailing the proposed Security Pact with unmeasured invective, has some still to spare for this latest display of complaisance to France.

Mr. Baldwin's settlement in America, Bays the "Express,"' was a grave and expensive blunder. This new surrender is a crying instance of financial weakness which is hardly credible: The nation cannot afford the sacrifice. The extreme Francophile organs are in a more difficult position. The judgments of the " Morning Post" are seldom lacking in promptitudie or confidence or a pronounced bias in favour of France, but • for once it is forced into the non-committal attitude which has so often been the target of its caustice wit. The " Morning Post," we are informed, emphasises that a settlement is still contingent "on the attitude of the United States, but, though no conclusion has been reached, it must be recognised that tho whole situation has changed for the better.

Would it be unfair comment to say that the best the " Morning Post " can say of the position is that it is not final 1! If the position has improved, the reason is to be found in the satisfaction with which France regards a very generous offer, but satisfaction must yield to increased bitterness if, on account of the less indulgent attitude of the United States or for any other reason, the /settlement is not as generous as the offer. The possibility that the generosity may be only temporary seems indeed to be but a poor ground for comfort, and it is not easy to see of what else the " Morning Post "is thinking. The thoughts of the "Daily Mail,", which usually rivals the " Morning Post " in its loyalty to France, are apparently too deep for words, or are too indefinite-to be regarded as worth cabling.

Of the more balanced organs of opinion we are definitely told that the " Daily Telegraph " makes no comment at all, and that " The Times" " expresses no direct opinion on the amount of ,the offer." The disapproval which this reticence implies presents an ominous contrast to the " unqualified enthusiasm " of M. Oaillaux, whom political correspondents are said to describe as " delighted " and " almost chortling." It will be interesting to see how much enthusiasm Mr. Churchill can muster when he next has a public word to say on the subject. His early treatment of the problem drew warm praise even from critics least biased in his favour, By unanswerable logic combined with a tact which ho cannot always be relied upon to display in equal measure, Mr. Churchill intervened when conversations were proceeding for the settlement of the French War Debt to America, and established the principle that Britain was entitled to have her cJaimr. considered at the same time. In January he played the leading par! in a Financial Conference which was described by Reuters Paris correspondent as " probably the first inter-Allied meeting ■whidi has Jeff, no heartburnings " find by the French Pvpss as " a red-letter day and a landmark in post-war history." Oa that eceasloa the Empire ww '

amused to hear on the complaint of an American delegate " that Mr. Churchill drove a very hard bargain." America is so well able to look after lieuself in these matters, and with her claim of £950,----000,000 against Britain and of more than £800,000,000 against Franceexceeding the indebtedness of France to Britain by nearly £200,----000,- such complete command of the position, that it was comical to think of her being squeezed. On the other hand, the good understanding with France which might be procured by a settlement on the lines now proposed would be dearly purchased if it gave America the impression that her hand is being forced by the present offer. " American circles," we are told," " are astonished and concerned by Britain's offer." It is therefore clear that it was made without her knowledge, and, if so, was it not a violation of the policy of consultation and joint action for which Mr. Churchill was contending at the end of last year? While Britain is prepared to settle the French debt at 2 per cent., America objects to take less than 3i per cent. If, as the " Morning Post" says, Britain's settlement with France is still contingent on the attitude of the United States, a higher rate may have to be fixed than 2 per cent., and not harmony but heartburning will be the result.