A BALANCE-SHEET

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 137, 11 June 1936, Page 11

A BALANCE-SHEET

DOSSES AND GAINS FROM I WAR LORD CECIL'S SURVEY Several thousand people drawn not ( >nly from London and Home . bounties but from distant parts of the :ountry assembled on May 8 at a denonstration in the Albert Hall organsod by the League ,of Nations Union :o affirm support of the League, and inlignation at the invasion of Abyssinia, jays "The Times." Lord Cecil presided ind among those who accepted platform tickets were the Ethiopian Minister, the High Commissioner for the Irish Free State, Viscountess : Gladstone, Lord Strabolgi, Sir Herbert and Lady Samuel, -Dame Adelaide Livingstone, Sir Raymond and Lady Unwin, Sir Norman Angell,- Sir George Paish, Canon Lewis Donaldson, Lady Bonham Carter, and representatives of _ various religious, scholastic, and political organisations. Lord Cecil said there had been a great triumph of evil. But the end was not yet. Even if the victory were complete, even if all resistance had been crushed, there was still the price of victory to be paid. Meanwhile our duty was as clear as it possibly could be. While there was a shade of hope remaining, while there was even, a. scintilla of independence, we could recognise no other Government of Abyssinia; the native rule of Ethiopia still remained. She was still a member of the League of Nations. She was still entitled to the joint protection which she was promised in that capacity. The League must still rrtaintain its policy of sanctions; and even must intensify them if necessary. (A voice: War in Europe.) Nothing but the. blackest treachery could urge any other course. WHOLE STRUCTURE SHAKEN. These events had shaken the whole structure of peace which for sixteen years they had been endeavouring to build up. Already the weaklings were clamouring for surrender. We were told from many mouths and in many newspapers that from the Leaguepoint of view, all was lost. "Nothing, in his judgment, could be less true. No one could question that the cause of. organised peace had suffered a severe setback; and that was all. The League had suffered a reverse, but was very far from being destroyed. We must wait till the fury of .the blood-lust was over; till the shouts of victory had died down; till men and women began to count up soberly the gains and losses of a policy which had deprived Italy of the good will of her ancient allies, of the good opinion of the civilised world, and had .imperilled her financial solvency. They, .must balance those losses against her gains —and what did they amount to? Primarily, the problem of holding a vast extent of mainly barren territory, populated by hardy and undisciplined mountaineers. The League might have -lost, but it was yet to be shown that Italy had gained. t Why had the system, failed in this instance? The reason was very simple. It was mainly due to the French_ reluctance to act up to her obligations in the early stages of the controversy. Must we conclude that France would never carry out her duties under the Covenant? To think that would be a most unjust and baseless conclusion. After all, the French people had recently been consulted and by- overwhelming majorities they had repudiated the Laval-Flan din policy. He read in "The Times" with great , interest that after consultation between the present Prime Minister of France and 1 the statesman whom all' anticipated as his successor—M. Blum—the outgoing Government had no intention at Geneva, as some of our defeatist newspapers had assumed, of pressing the withdrawal of sanctions. As The Times" put it, at the least they would propose no change, .and at the most they would be ready to continue and intensify sanctions. All, then, depended on us. MR. EDEN'S DESIRE. It seemed to him that since Mr. Eden had been Foreign Minister he had shown a genuine desire to act up to League principles, and a genuine effort to carry those principles mtoeffeet. But even he could do nothing without the support of public opinion. He appealed to every member of-the 'audience to furnish to every member of Parliament irrefutable- evidence of what the people of this country W Mr? d Attlee, M.P., moved the following resolution: — < This meeting. affirms its support of the League of Nations and the principle of ctil lectlve security; 1 pledges itself to take ' all constitutional means to strengthen the League as an instrument of international P e aceand of peaceful changej expresses its indication at the invasion of Abyssinia by Italy in deflance of her treaty obligations and at her barbarous methods of warfare; and calls upon his Majesty's Government to urge the maintenance of sanctions against Italy until she is ready to accept terms of peace approved by the Souncil of the League. He said his party unhesitatingly decided to support the League in this instance and that was not surprising because it was composed largely of persons who had experience of collective security and knew that besides conferring advantages it involved obligations. It was a poor kind of trade unionist who joined his union for sick benefits and resigned immediately he was called upon to stand for collective security. Now was the time to strengthen the League. Sir Archibald Sinclair, M.P., seconding the resolution, said. though the League had failed shamefully to protect Abyssinia from aggression the League itself was not beaten. The struggle between arbitrary power represented by Italy and law represented by the League continued, and the authority of the League must be asserted, they were resolute, it would not be a long struggle. The eco.nomic and financial position of Italy was already seriously undermined. If it were true, as some said, that other nations would not co-operate, that was no reason why Britain should be the first to give in. On the contrary, he believed that if Britain gave' a firm, consistent lead, other Powers would rally loyally to the League. COLLECTIVE ACTION. Lord Lytton said the' first article of their faith was that Britain's greatest need was peace. It was entirely fallacious to say, as Sir Samuel Hoare and many leading spokesmen had often said, that they were prepared to fight if need be where their interests were concerned, and would take no paft in wars with which they had no concern. They would not take part in any war for a purely national interest, but they w.ere prepared ; to take collective action, military action, too, if need be, not -for a national purpose but to prevent a breach oi the peace. (A voice: Never!) On the understanding that armed forces would be used for that purpose alone, they wished them to be strong and effective. The second article of their faith was that as a condition of British participation in collective responsibility foi the maintenance of peace they expected the armed forces of all countries sharing their responsibility to be pro portionately and simultaneously re duced. The third -article was that iJ war was to be eliminated as a means of altering the status quo in the world they' must be prepared to alter it bj peaceful means ' arid they he prepared to provide" the machinery

s [. by which that peaceful change r could- be effected. That meeting' > was originally called to advocate j s military sanctions to stop the war in I )- Abyssinia. They were still prepared j to take that course if necessary—(a | I cry-of "Shame," cheers, and a voice: s "You have got it all wrong")—but in d view of later events time was not now y against them and they could wait, e The resolution was carried by acy clamation. 1