Evening Post. THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 1935. GERMANY'S TWO VOICES

Evening Post, Issue 20, 24 January 1935, Page 10

Evening Post. THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 1935. GERMANY'S TWO VOICES

On February 5, 1923, a miners' strike began in the Saar territory, in .which about 100,000 men were speedily involved, and the outlook, was so serious that the Governing Commission considered it necessary not only to strengthen the French garrison but to promulgate a decree restricting the freedom of speech and of the Press under heavy penalties. Strong .exception was taken to this' measure by British opinion, which had condemned still more strongly the action of the French Government. that had provoked the strike. On January 11, 1923, Germany being in afrear with her reparation instal-, ments under the Treaty, M. Poincare had sent a French army into the' Ruhr to enforce payment. The con, trast between that high-handed, in- ■ judicious, and worse than futile proIcedure and the moderation and restraint of the recent attitude of the French towards the problem of the Saar illustrates the striking change that has since come over tiie spirit of their dream. Britain has received most of the credit for the international solution which has enabled the plebiscite to be taken in peace, but France had to waive her rights before there .was any opening for the British suggestion. The violence of the Nazis, for which it must of course, be- admitted that M.' Poincare's occupation of the Ruhr had prepared the way, would have given the French Government a pretext and even a reason for keeping the, matter, in its own- hands if it had been so minded, but it abandoned.this right and even consented to the exclusion of French troops, from the international force. ■ In the "Observer" of December 9, Mr. Garvin emphasises this aspect of the matter and its happy results upon Anglo-French relations.

Everything has been clone now, lie writes, to- avoid tho exasperation of German racial feeling*. This is acknowledged by Ilerr Hitlor when he falls in' with tho plan and describesit as "very helpful." Tho highest credit is duo .to the new Flandin Cabinet, and especially to M. . Laval, for their conciliatory temper. Nothing of lato has donq so much to draw Britain and France closer together. Baron Aloisi for the Duco and Italy has played a mediatory parti with equal ability and good will.

In the same article Mr. Garvin makes another point, -for which we are grateful. Mr.-Lloyd George, who is not noted for generosity to his opponents, spoke highly in his speech at Bangor of Mr. Eden's services to peace at Geneva, but he was really killing two birds . with one stone. By his compliment lo an opponent whom he has no cause to dislike he was slighting another whom he has good reason for detesting. But it seemed to us that Mr. Lloyd George was justified in this silent blow at the Foreign Secretary, since it looked as though Mr. Eden and not Sir John Simon was responsible for the settlement of the Saar as • well as of the Yugoslav problem. ' We are glad to learn from Mr. Garvin that this impression was incorrect.

Crabbing National Government', he writes, is for some persons a game, and with others a mania. For its achievement on tho Saar question tho Cabinet, and especially its best-abused Minister, deserve for once a vote of. thanks from all civilisation. Instead of whicli, as the colebrated Jndgc romarked, they will receive no thanks whatever from several of our own incongruous but incorrigible factions. The Foreign Secretary, ond none other, has performed the conjuring feat of reconciling the views of Herr Hitler and Monsieur Laval on the- nearest matter that, might havo become' a serious threat to peace.

The best-abused Minister in thej Cabinet has had so much more than his due that we are glad lo know| that he is entitled to;the credit of. this brilliant "conjuring feat." Since the poll it is France and not Germany that has displayed the conciliatory attitude with which both of them were previously credited. If France has made any mistake'it is that her expectations from the German victory were too sanguine. Nothing could have been more friendly or more tactful than M. Flandin's references to the matter, and there was no suspicion iof envy, jingoism; or other unpleasantness in the popular attitude as represented by the Press. But when the French newspapers "welcomed the decisiveness of the result as averting international complications," they overlooked the possibility—and the oversight was not peculiar to France — that there might bo too much of a g6od thing. A narrow majority either way would have prolonged and aggravated the unrest, and perhaps extended it to other lands, but •an overwhelming majority is now seen to be not without its dangers. The Nazis had been worked up to such an inflammable. condition by their wrongs, real and imaginary, their sufferings and the wonderfully efficient propaganda of their leaders that even a moderate majority in the Saar might have been more than they could stand. But it" certainly seems as jthough this len to one majority on an issue which they had been taught to regard as of vital concern to the safety and the honour of the Fatherland has quite upset their balance, and that, under official guidance or even in spite of it, the

result may be to precipitate the international complications which it was at first expected to avert. Immediately after the result of the plebiscite was known HenHitler spoke of "appeasement and reconciliation" and of "our deep desire for peace," in terms that could hardly have been bettered. He even had a word of "gratitude and satisfaction at the loyal help other nations Lave ghxn France and ourselves during the difficult days by guaranteeing orderly procedure during the plebiscite." But on the very next day a different note,, was sounded by one of the two or" three most powerful of his colleagues. The occasion was the great,, torchlight demonstration which was. held in Berlin to celebrate the Saar victory:

Dr. Oocbbols, Minister "of Propaganda, speaking from" tho Reichstag stops, bitt'orly attacked Mr. G. G. Kriox, chairman of thb Saar Governing Commission, declaring .that his days wero numbered. Ho accused him o£ siding with tho "status quo,"-party, adding: "If ridicule could kill, Mr. Knoxjs only remaining task would bo to dig a mass grave for tho separatists."

There is not much appeasement or reconciliation here, not much gratitude or satisfaction for the loyal help of other nations, but abundance of insult for the international Commission which, has been faithfully governing the Saar and for its brave, loyal, and highly efficient British chairman. The refined humour about digging "a mass grave for the separatists"' with' which the Minister, of Enlightenment ' and Propaganda con-1 eluded his insult, is particularly noteworthy. But the Nazis in the Saar, who evidently prefer, therlead of Dr. Goebbels ijrf '"this matter to 'thai of Herr'-* Hitler/are"saving Mr. Knox the trouble.' The report of the "News-Chronicle's" Sa"arbr,ucken correspondent on .the reign of. terror in the Saar as cabled on .Tuesday includes this appropriate item: "Denunciations are' in full s>vay, the favourite fornuof. intimidation, being to .dig a pit in front ', of. an . antiNazi's house'and tell|ng himvthis is your grave after March 'l."_?"., The procedure is one which should-make an equal appeal to the-patriotism of the. Minister of. Enlightenment and to his-sense of humour, but what has Herr Hitler 'to say about,, it? "Not for the first time Germany is speaking with two voices and, he should let the World know which .it is to believe.