MR. BALFOUR ON ARBITRATION.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 102, 20 June 1911, Page 3

MR. BALFOUR ON ARBITRATION.

Mr Balfour is admittedly the most f scholarly thinker and most incisive speaker' among the living British statesmen. His speech at the London Guildhall, where ho joined Mr Asquith in support of the proposed Anglo-American Arbitration Treaty, was one of his great efforts. “H is quite true,” said Mr Balfour, ‘That it is folly to attempt to make either positive 'law or international law go too far in advance of public opinion or international opinion. Laws and treaties can do much. I grant the critic that they cannot do everything, and 1 even go further and i say when a law or when a treaty goes so far in advance of the public opinion of the time it may he that more harm is clone than good by 'the well-meant attempt to embody impossible ideals in paper provisions; and I cannot imagine a greater disaster to civilisation for centuries to come than that, after 1 such a treaty as we hope for has been carried into effect, it should he broken by cither of the contracting parties. That, indeed, would be a blow, not merely to international faith, but to civilisation and progress, under which wo should stagger for generations. Therefore 1 am quite ready to grant that, if public opinion on "the two sides, of the Atlantic were not ripe for this great development, it would not be wise for statesmen to encourage it; so far as my observation goes—and I do not think I am too sanguine—this gloomy view of the situation in no sense represents the facts. I speak naturally with ' more 1 knowledge, and therefore, mdre confidence, of my own fellow-countrymen : than I can venture to do' for tjie English-speak-ing peoples 3000 miles a way; and while 1 do not think that I am wrong when I say that—not merely the churches, not merely those who may be driven to apply 1 , and almost all attempt to apply, what is for the moment an impossible ideal to'the practical working of life—that not only those sections of society in America and the United Kingdom are in favour of this movement, but 1 believe the great mass of public opinion of all classes and of both countries are in favour of it, and that, therefore, if the skill of statesmen and diplomatists is indeed able to embody it in the formula of a treaty, there is no danger that either of the two great contracting parties in moments of stress, temptation, and difficulty, will endeavour to break away from it. Among the infinite blessings which, I think, would follow upon a treaty of this kind, I do not regard any immediate fruit in the reduction in the burden of armaments as one to which wo can too confidently look forward. But that does not diminish—l hope I am wrong —but even l if I am right, that does not, arid du£ht riot to, diminish the zeal with'which wo should pursue tin's ideal, not of alliance, not of understanding, not of ' anything which could' produce international complications with the great Englishspeaking dommunities across.the Atlantic.” ' 1 '