Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1929 ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 3 April 1929, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1929 ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

TWO quite contradictory opinions, published in our issue of yesterday, were expressed by Colonel W. S. Tupper, an American, and the Rev. I!. J. Campbell, D.D., on the important question of Anglo-American relations. Colonel Tupper, who is the guest of the New Zealand Government, said, at Christchurch, that there is no idea of competition in the new American naval policy. "War with the English people," he said, "is unthinkable. In a friendly understanding among the English-speaking peoples is the greatest hope of world-peace." On the other hand, the Rev. Mr Campbell, speaking at Brighton, England (where he has been incumbent since 1924), afteran exrensive tour of the United States, said, "We are being constantly told on this side of the Atlantic that an AngloAmerican war is unthinkable. It isn't unthinkable." Which of these two opinions is correct? Whom are we to believe—the American Colonel, or the English clergyman? The Rev. Mr Campbell went on to say:—

I was dismayed at many things I heard and read concerning America's intention and readiness to proceed to extremities against Britain. . . . There is an element (in the U.S.A.) which hates Britain, and would we!coni2 the thought of attack. Another element does not particularly want war, but is fully determined that America shall replace Britain as mistress of the seas.

The fact seems to be that while the British people are profoundly pacific, there are in the United States certain vociferous politicians and vitriolic journalists who, voicing the opinions of fac- ■ tions traditionally inimical to Britain, have systematically fomented ill-feeling against the Mother Country, with a view to assisting the American big-navy party to obtain the consent of Congress to large appropriations for new warships. To this end much misrepresentation of Britain's navai traditions ami policy has taken place, and the whole of the United States have rung with denunciations of Britain as a traditional and potential enemy. The venom of scurrility and enmity has done its worst to poison the public of the United States against Great Britain.' Such conduct is disgraceful to the American nation. It cannot but result in lowering American prestige. It is not likely to lead to war, because it is not to be supposed that such vulgar vituperation represents the feeling of the great mass of the American people, who, we are convinced, love peace as truly as do the people of Great Britain and the Dominions. If it were not so, there might be a danger of the American fire-eaters causing a conflagration. But we believe that the sober and stable elements in Great Britain and the Dominions, and in the United States themselves, are strong enough and imperturbable enough to preserve peace. AH this talk of war is mischievous in Lhe extreme, if it is not actually dangerous. Such talk is to be condemned in the sternest manner possible. Anyone who talks lightly of the possibility of war between the two great branches of the English-speaking people—be he polit'cian or parson, journalist, mob orator, or university professor—is the enemy of his country and, what is worse, the enemy of civilisation. For the purpose of perpetuating peace, both Great Britain and the United States, at the latter's suggestion, signed an agreement to settle ail their differences and disputes hy arbitration. That of course means that arbitration would be final. In such circumstances, all talk of war between Iho two nations is not only irrelevant, it is ignoble and barbarous. At least let the United States have the chance of proving the Kellogg Pact to be something more than "a scrap of paper." At least give them the opportunity to prove that their word is their bond. They are unfortunate in including in their vast population many people who would be a disgrace to any nation, but at least they should be given the chance to show that that base fraction does not speak for the whole nation. It is true that they would be responsible if they should allow their degenerates to take charge of their Government, but at least that Government should be trusted to abide by its own agreements, until it lias proved itself unworthy of such confidence. For the rest, the British Commonwealth of Nations is well able to look after itself in all emergencies. In all circumstances it will "play the game." As for Great Britain, sho is too great, Loo noble, too well-versed in political science, and too deeply-imbued with international good-will to give the fireeaters of the United States any real cause for enmity. In such circumstances, though t# future may be difficult, there

need be no great fear of a rupture with tho United States which, while posing as the friends and promoters of worldpeace, could not with impunity and without a cause create war.