Evening Post. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1930. A DICTATOR'S DILEMMA

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 79, 30 September 1930, Page 8

Evening Post. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1930. A DICTATOR'S DILEMMA

On his return from Geneva to London Mr. Arthur Henderson was reported yesterday to have said that the meeting of the League of Nations had been interesting and useful, if less spectacular. In striking contrast with the Foreign Secretary's review of the work of an organisation which is normally more useful than spectacular was the report from Madrid which appeared beside it in yesterday's issue. The revolutionary campaign which' the Spanish Republicans have opened may or may not prove useful, but it is beyond question highly spectacular, and while in this respect it presents a singular contrast to the tranquil procedure of the 'League, its objects differ just as widely from those of the equally spectacular revolutionary campaign in Germany which has caused a slump in the Stock Exchanges of Berlin and Frankfort and fluttered all the Foreign Offices of Europe. After seven years of dictatorship the Liberals of Spain, and not a few of those who not long ago called themselves Conservatives, are apparently prepared to destroy the Monarchy as well as the dictatorship, and to substitute a Republic. After nearly twelve years of peace and eleven years of Republican government, the Fascists of Germany have determined to overthrow the Republic in favour of a dictatorship, and do not mind risking a. civil war and .a European war, for all they know,- a World War in pursuit of their objects. Two obvious morals of these contrasts and resemblances are that human nature is very hard to please, and that Shelley was not far from the mark when he said that v Naught shall endure save mutability, Though under the shadow of such a text there is no temptation to. prophesy, the volatility of the Spanish temperament and the sudden reaction from the restraints of the last seven years supply special reasons for a suspense of judgment in this case. It is only at intervals and in very small instalments that the Spanish people have enjoyed freedom of speech since Primo do Rivera's coup d'etat in 1923. When General Berenguer was called upon to succeed him there was immediate evidence of a more liberal and tolerant spirit in the administration. He was anxious to have an early General Election, so that the Cortes could be convened and a constitutional sanction obtained for his Government; but that object has been postponed die" by the impossibility of'the. existing roll and the apparently interminable task of preparing a new one. The new Dictator conceded at the outset some relaxation of the Press censorship and some freedom of public meeting, but the abuse of the concessions and the resulting disorders compelled the restoration of the old restrictions. There has been much to-and-fro business since then, and liberties which had no legal sanction have been winked at when they-'kept within bounds. But now all restrictions appear to have been removed by a single stroke of the pen, and the immediate results were reported yesterday. Sunday, we are told, was the first day on which the open expression of Republicanism has been permitted since the coup d'etat of 1923, and both sides evidently appreciated the significance of the occasion. Gratitude to the Government which had granted this permission did nothing to mitigate the indignation of its opponents, nor had the Government expected that it would. The crowd of 20,000 which packed the Madrid bull ring was effectually prevented from doing anything worse than talking and listening by, an enormous display of force posted at strategic points on avenues leading to the bull ring, also inside the ring itself. The crowd appear to have accepted these precautions as in accordance with the rules of the game, but "displayed great anger when a military aeroplane flew over." Neither aeroplanes nor soldiers were permitted, however, to interfere with the objects of the meeting. The programme included revolutionary speehea and a unanimous resolution expressing a determination to overthrow the present regime, a demand that King Alfonso abdicate in order that a tragedy might be averted, and a Republic be established. The programme may be described as frank, comprehensive, and thorough, and we may be sure that Madrid is not the only place at which the abdication of Alfonso, the abolition of .the dictatorship, and the establish-

ment of a Republic have been demanded. It seems also safe to assume that if there had been any loss of life or serious breach of the peace we should have heard of it.

At the Madrid meeting the language of the speakers is described in general as moderate, but Senor Lerroux is mentioned as an exception. If his phraseology was moderate, his sentiments were certainly sufficiently thorough.

Spaniards must recover their sovereignty, he said, eithor by the means which Germany used when she expelled the Kaiser or following Eussia's oxample.

In offering Alfonso the choice between exile and death Senor Lerroux cannot be said to have treated his King with excessive generosity, and it is not surprising to learn that a meeting at which such language was used "aroused great excitement," and is considered to have faced the authorities with a very difficult prob-

It is now being asked,, says our report, how. the Government will treat the speakers, for although the censorship is lifted, attack on tho monarch is prohibited, and recently there were several prosecutions for this offence.

It is difficult to see that the utmost anxiety to placate the people by conceding a freedom of speech which has been so long denied them, and at the same time to ease the position by the letting off of steam, can induce the Government to tolerate such language as this. Even in Britain, which was held up by Senor Lamora as an "example to the world in political affairs,"^ freedom of speech has never been held to cover incitement to murder of any kind, and addressed to an excited crowd Senor Lerroux's language might reasonably be so interpreted, notwithstanding the milder treatment which he mentioned in the alternative. But in the case of a Sovereign, language which stops far short of an incitement to murder or deposition must be prohibited as treason. If General Berenguer dares not set the law in motion for the protection of the King, he will administer a very serious blow to the authority both of the King and of the Government. But either to take legal proceedings or to withdraw the liberty which has been abused would also be dangerous. The Dictator is in a very awkward dilemma.