Evening Post. MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1927. THE LONGER, THE BETTER

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 130, 6 June 1927, Page 8

Evening Post. MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1927. THE LONGER, THE BETTER

Ihe compliment paid by British Labour to the Soviet representatives in London immediately after they had received their notice to quit produced a very painful impression, fortunately it was »not an official compliment from the Labour Parly Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald had no part in it, but that section of his followers whose pressure he is becoming increasingly unable to resist, and which at the last conference of the Independent Labour Party carried what was virtually a vote of no-confi-dence in his leadership, was strongly represented. Mr. Lansbury, of course, was there, and with him were Mr. Maxton, Mr. Purcell, and Mr Ben Tillett, and even Mr. Walter Citrine, who, as secretary of the Irade Union Congress, is supposed to represent views of a less lurid red than the others. It was appropriate that Mr. Lansbury should have been the leader and apparently the spokesman of the enterprise. Was it not Mr. Lansbury who years ago, when it was considered a far more risky procedure than it would be to-day, approved of taking a subsidy from Moscow to relieve the stricken finances of the "Daily Herald"? And was. it not Mr. Lansbury who about three months ago, as the Labour spokesman at the memorial service held on the second anniversary of Sun Vat Sen's death, joined with the rest of the company in kowtowing three times before the Chinese leader's portrait, and declared that Britain's record in China was "so disgusting and disgraceful that he felt honoured that any Britishers were allowed to attend"? Mr. Lansbury was doubtless equally proud to represent the devotion of the Red battalions of British Labour to their friends in Russia in a time of trouble. The agents of Bolshevism in London had received notice to quit because under the guise of diplomacy and commerce they had been carrying on a propaganda which aimed at nothing less than the destruction of the British Empire. Mr. Lansbury and his friends do not advocate lying and sPying> violence and war, but their tenderness for the foreigners who are prepared to resort to all these things in order to destroy Britain is unbounded. A common hatred of capitalism and a common recognition of Britain as its most powerful bulwark apparently induce them to condone these eccentricities of method as immaterial and to, reserve all their moral indignation and all their hatred for their own people. Three or four, days after Mr. Lansbury's obeisance at the shrine of Sun Vat Sen Mr. Mitchell Banks summarised as follows the principles of foreign policy which British Socialists have thus been induced to adopt:— (1) In any dispute with a foreign pou-cr Great Britain ia always wrong. (2) Always trust a foreign revolutionary rather than a British official. (3) In any conflict between t,wo groups of foreigners back the particular group which is most hostile to Groat Britain. # (4) If both groups are equally hostile, find out which side the Bolsheviks are on, and back them. (5) If anything untoward happens to our countrymen, whether in ludia, in Egypt, or in China, the course of action is to say: "They hiivo brought it upon themselves by their own provocativo and arrogant conduct, and, anyhow, they aro only capitalists and not worth troubling about." It was in strict accordance with this attitude that Mr. Lansbury, Mr. Maxton, and Mr. Purcell saw nothing wrong in the malpractices of what the Soviet Note described as "a British trading company of high standing," and of its Russian employees and accomplices which were revealed by the Arcos raid. In China "a Britisli trading company of high standing," financed and run from London, would have been entirely beyond the pale of Labour sympathy, but in London such a company, run from Moscow, staffed to a large extent by Russians, and engaged in anti-British propaganda, was of course in a different position. The only sinner was the uncharitable British Government which entertained vile suspicions and having proved them true elected to withdraw the privileges conceded to the trading company and the Trade Delegation and to break off relations with the guilty Power. And so within an hour after the notice to quit the Soviet's representatives "were comfortably lunching at the House of Commons as guests of Labour Commoners who had been in Russia, and other Labour leaders." The proceedings were unfortunately "quite informal and private," but Mr. Lansbury has explained the philanthropy by which they were inspired. 'Some of us, he says, who have been friends with Bussia thought it would bo nice to have a meal and wish the departing Russians good luck. . . . The British present had a feeling that- the break was only, temporary, and the two great nations must come together again shortly. If Mr. Lansbury had his way his Russian friends would of course come back to-morrow on their own terms,' with no questions asked, and with a license to abuse British hospitality to their hearts' content. Much indignation was naturally excited by this effusive display of benevolence towards those who in spirit are the enemies of the country, but after the lapse of a week has given it time to cool balm is now supplied in the

shape of comic relief of a most delectable character. "Pantomime" is said to be the proper term for the departure of the Soviet officials on Friday Mr. Lansbury, "with a large bunch oi red roses and tulips," was a<*ain to the fore. Mr. Saklatvala, who was denied admission even as a visitor to the United States but is allowed by the tolerance of Britain to have a seat in her Parliament, was" a good second with a nosegay of "huge red poppies." What specific contribution Mr. Arthur Henderson made to the proceedings we are not told, but perhaps the blushes induced by the strange company he was in—the "three hundred Communists, mostly foreigners, singing alternately 'The International' and the 'Red Flag'" brought him into line with the colour scheme. The musical items were followed by a delightful climax. Some women called out, "Long live the British Republic!" and everybody laughed. M. Myiski, who was accompanying M. Rosenglotz, was overcome by tho singing and kissed Mr. Lansbury. Then the whistle blew. It was just as well the whistle blew, or Mr. Henderson might have been the next victim. It is pleasanter to think of Mr. Lansbury as enjoying a monopoly of that Bolshevik kiss which not even Mr. Saklatvala was allowed to infringe. "Righteousness and peace had kissed each other" on the Victoria platform, and it is to be hoped that the cameras did full justice to the great event. In Mr. Rosenglotz's last words we can all concur: "I hope to see you all in Moscow soon." May they all go there soon, and the longer they stay the better.