A REVISION OF THE TREATY

Evening Star, Issue 17927, 24 March 1922, Page 5

A REVISION OF THE TREATY

MR KEYNES’S VIEW?

IS GERMANY GUILTLESS?

Mr J. M. Keynes, whore- sequel to ‘The Economic Consequences of, Iho Peace ’ has juwt been published under (he litlo of A Envision of the Treaty,' has the gift of interesting his renders in problems that arc at ouco vital and obscure, hew people can think in millions; fewer still can make intelligible and attractive to others the play of flieir idcan amid the noughts that trail off from intelligible units into the vague. Mr Keynes can, and that, is one of tho secrete of Hie success of iris first book on the peace. He suggested a point of view. It was a brilliant performance (says a writer in 'The Times'), yet it may- well bo asked whether its success was duo so much to the soundness of Mr Keynes s arguments as to his personality and his style. ; One asks that question again after reading tho now book. Again one Is baffled by° tho interesting problem of Mr Keynes s personality. Is he an. eeonomiot, an a politician, or a detached philosopherP Ho is all these in turn, perhaps all at once. Yet tho new book explains something that was not clear when its predecessor was published. Then Mr Keynes had a particular advantage. Ho had the- distinction of a man" opposing views that appeared to bo commonplace. He has not, that advantage now. ‘the views he enunciated in Xhe Economic Consequences of the Peace’ have become commonplace, not only among tho Germans and their friends, but in certain circles in this country. The sequel from tho SUCCCOS of its predecessor. Mr Keynes has a horror of the banal. He is certainly anythin"- but banal hr tho new book, but ho has to move swiftly and trippingly to escape from the reflection of banality that his own previous words have cast. UNFULFILLED PROPHECIES. One thing Mr Keynes freely admits. His prophecies of disaster have not come true. He scea that “in spile of trade depression and disordered exchanges, Europe, under the surface* is much stabler and much healthier than two years ago.” There arc signs ot definite .progress towards settlement. The perils that were ahead have been ea.ely paa&d, ha considers, “ because the patience of tho common people and the stability ot its institutions have survived the woiSt shocks thev will receive,” and also because “the actions of those in power have been wiser than their- words.” " Many of the misfortunes,” he adds, which I predicted as attendant on the Reparation chapter have not occurred, because im serious attempt has been made to execute it.” , This is ingenious, but docs it explain the indubitable fact tint the prophecies of disMter have not come true? Granted that the peoples, apathetic, weary- of struggle, relieved to find themselves ouco more in tho shelter of some semblance of their old institutions, are avoreo from disorder, and are slowly picking up the threads of common ite in spite of provocation. Is it true that things arc bettor than they might have been because of the failure to carry out tho Reparation chapter? And is tins failuio duo to tho better impulses of statesmen who committed follies when they framed tho treaty? It is a curious argument. _ Trade is stagnant, the Budgets of tho allied countries show great gaps, the people of this country are taxed almost beyond endurance, yet Germany has so far most skilfully evaded tho payment of her reparation dues. Is there no ill-will in GennknyP A STRANGE ARGUMENT.

Mr Keynes sketches in vivid outline tho history of tho successive Allied Conferences on Reparations during the- last two yearn tho disputes,, the conflicts, the _ repeated efforts to find a compromise. It is an instructive story. Mr Keynes regards as the root of the trouble' the recalcitrancy of_ the French, their refusal to recognise the logic of facts; and among tho French it is not the hard-working peasants wno arc to blame, but tho grasping Imperialist financiers, to whoso will the politicians are compelled to bow. Mr Lloyd George is represented as continually trying to follow the path of wisdom, but as being thwarted by bis French colleagues, until at last M. Briand appeared, “a kindred spirit,” who contented to play the’neccssary game of bluff with loud words and very modest actions. In this pretty interpretation of recent history is no suggestion that Got"many may- be in any sense to blame, that in intentional German obstruction may be ono of the chief causes of our present plight. Germany, in Mr Keynes’s view, has been horribly maltreated, and ho welcomes every indication that her evasion has been successful, that her stubbornness and importunity are weakening tho firm front of tho Allies and causing some of them to yield to their mood., His “ logic of facto” is a logic in which a systematic Gorman effort to evade payment plays an important part. , Mr Lloyd George, to Mr Keynes s gratification, is yielding to this “ logic.” Not that the detached philosopher has any particular illusions about tho Prime Minister. Ho says: “ Tho deeper and fouler the bogs into which Mr Lloyd George leads us, the more credit is his for getting ns out. He leads us in to satisfy our desires; he leads us out to savo our souls. He hands us down the primrose path, and puts out the bonfire just in time. Who, ever before, enjoyed jho best of heaven and hell as we do?_ In England opinion has nearly completed ite swing, and the Prime Minister is making ready to win a General Election on Forbidding Germany to Pay, Employment for Everyone, and a Happier Europe for All. Why not, indeed? But this Faustus of ours shakes too quickly his kaleidoscope ot halos and l hell-fire for mo to depict the hues as they melt into one another.”

Still, Mr Keynes has an argument in favor of Mr Lloyd George. Ho suggests that he took the responsibility for the treaty against his batter judgment, and that “ the- publio history of tho two years that have followed it exhibit him as protecting Europe from aa many ot the evil consequences of tho treaty ns it lay in his power to prevent, with a craft few could have bettered, preserving the peace, though not the prosperity, of Europe, seldom expressing the truth, yet often acting under its influence.”

Mr Keynes claims that since ho is not a statesman ho is at hberty to 'speak the truth frankly. He writes’ an interesting book. The critical reader will derive profit from many passages in. his review of th© .various features of the reparations problem, those ym s ooal deliveries and

the Wiesbaden Agreement. But the whole atgumelut loads up to what Mr Keynes regards as the ultimate truth that a thorough ■revision of the treaty is necessary. Stated barely, tho proposed revision is bused on a full admission -by the Allies that they have been economically defeated by the obstructive tactiea dT Germany. If we have really come to that, then those, pvho will may take comfort in Mr Keynes’s plausible arguments that will obscure with their iridescence our sad condition. Tho peace promises is subtly suggestive of greater perils to come.