THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, OCTOBER, 28, 1927. THE RUMANIAN THRONE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19779, 28 October 1927, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, OCTOBER, 28, 1927. THE RUMANIAN THRONE.

Though obscurity hovers over the actual situation in Rumania there is a degree of circumstantial evidence to show that a movement in favour of restoring Prince Carol to the throne has caused political ferment in the country. A prince in exile with what some people are inclined to regard as a natural, distinct from a legal, claim to succession, can be an exceedingly disturbing factor in national life. English history shows this abundantly. A certain analogy with past episodes of British experience is shown by Rumania, where the constitutional position of the monarchy and the power of Parliament over the succession are not clearly defined as they now are in British practice, but were not when rival claimants to the throne had to be taken seriously. It can be accepted then that whether the exact state of tension suggested by news despatches actually exists in Rumania in ail the detail described, or not, there is nothing inherently improbable in the accounts given of it. If the crisis said to be ruling does in fact brood over the country, it will be infinitely regrettable, but the situation will not differ much from what was forecasted as probable by acute observers when King Ferdinand died, and the country was left with an infant successor, and a Council of Regency established for the next succeeding twelve years. Though Rumania emerged from the war enhanced in size and power, there was a legacy of problems, social and economic, demanding a long period of tranquillity for adjustment. Interruption of the process might bring serious consequences.

When Prince Carol renounced the succession last year, leaving the country in pursuit of a second matrimonial indiscretion, there was no question that his action was final. It was, at least, so accepted by the late King. In a letter to the Prime Minister, King Ferdinand, after calling upon all good citizens to "do ■what in them lies for the peace and progress of thes country,'' wrote of his errant son: "For the peace of the country I have sacrificed my fatherly desire to see him again, and I charge him to keep his promise not to return without the permission of the Government. Let my son Carol respect scrupulously the legal conditions made by his renunciation of the throne and the sacred duty of a Rumanian son and a father to respect the undertaking which he has given of his own free will." It was a moving appeal, and will meet with a poorer reception than it deserves if Prince Carol becomes ai\ intriguer, or allows himself to be used for the purposes of intrigue, against peace and order in Rumania. The possibilities are there. The country has never been accustomed to regard the throne as entirely aloof from and completely without interest in political currents. It is even more difficult to visualise a committee chosen from its midst as occupying that position of complete detachment. Even before King Ferdinand died there was a tendency, as commentators have said, "to criticise the Regency in its relation to political parties, and dissatisfaction with any of its acts may give rise to the conviction that the country's interests require its early termination or its reconstruction on frankly political lines." There, is evidently an atmosphere of politics gathering about the Regency, though according to the latest cable messages. it is the instigator rather than the victim of the movement in progress. Such a situation could be just as unfortunate as the other one described in the quotation. There has been sharp discussion, it is said, between the Regency and the Prime Minister over the treatment of Prince Carol, but a further hint suggests that the proposal for a broad coalition of parties is inspired by the wish to depose the Prime Minister, Til. Bratianu. There should be no room for question about the treatment of Carol if the last solemn injunction of the late King is observed. If the Prince plays the wholly passive role there enjoined upon him, and if the country accepts the position as advised, there need be no dispute over his treatment by Rumania. He then becomes a private individual, living his own life abroad. This does not appear to be happening, especially if Carol is to be used as an excuse for assailing the position of the Prime Minister. M. Bratianu was returned to power by an overwhelming majority only about, a fortnight before King Ferdinand's death. Fie is experienced in public affairs and has associated with him a Cabinet of ability and of experience almost equal to his own. He showed a disposition early in affairs to govern firmly. He succeeded a coalition, headed by Prince Stirbey. which had proved that such artificial associations of parties found little favour in the eyes of the country. With all the difficulties faced in post-war year 3, Rumania has appeared assured of reasonable tranquillity. If the ambitions of Prince Carol, or any movement associated with them, disturb this situation, it will be doubly unfortunate ; partly because the problems of the day, properly grappled, should leave no time for dissension, and partly because, on the most charitable view of his career, Carol does not emerge as a worthy cause for destroying the internal peace of the country.