Arrer tHe War. 1919 ro 1921. By Lieutenant Colonel C. A'Court Reington. London: Constable & Ca.
Pp. xv. 480. 2ls. net, "Wells came in late, but did not speak. He told me that he was astonished at my sanity." Readers of Colonel Repington's previous diary may share. some of Mr. Wells's astonishment when they come to his new one. For this time he has not studied audacity; per-Sons are subsidiary to policies and Piquancy is supplanted by sober reporting. The diaries cover practically the whole of 1921, a wanderyear in which Colonel Reington was constantly in the Central European and Balkan capitals, following up crises and conferences in the wake of the new European directorate. Then in the autumn he crossed to Washington and attended the opening stages of the Disarmament Conference.
It is not, then, a book to tickle tired minds, but rather a diffuse essay in foreign politics to agitate active intelligence. The detailed observations are the groundwork for the entry on August 9:
"Returned to London. Crossing the Channel cogitated what prescriptions should give for Europe's ailments. I would cure exchange and currency first by redistributing the gold now so largely, unnaturally, and uselessly hoarded in American banks, by withdrawing unhealthy units of European currency, and by substituting others on a gold basis.
I prefer this to the scheme of asking the United States to forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. Also I prefer it to the Ter Moulen scheme, or barter on a large scale, or export credits, which, however useful, are actually only palliatives, And later:
I do not believe in disarmament as best or oven the right cure for Europe's ills. Armaments are a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. I believe in obligatory arbitration when the Powers, and above all America, are great and wise enough to accept -it.
This faith Colonel Repington took to Washington there to confirm it, The curious thing about his book is his almost total neglect of the force working for his goal. He scarcely mentions the League of Nations, except to tell a story against it. Yet it is no use talking oF compulsory arbitration unless one is prepared to work for tha new social machinery. One is left wondering whether Colonel Re-Pington sufficiently realises the vast, indeed the revolutionary, ein international relations which he approves. One does not ask that he should accept the League of Nations as it is, but it is mere idleness to suggest com-
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.