Nov. 9.
'That Herr Hitler's speech at Weimar should' have aroused a certain amount of criticism seems inevitable when its tone is considered. It certainly shows no improvement over his Saarbruecken address, which was also not well received abroad, and there is an ever-Browing section of world opinion which is asking when Der Fuehrer will cease from this particular method of disseminating irritation. The sane view of the whole matter fs that much of what he said was designed for home consumption, but it is nevertheless! regrettable that a leader of the standing of Herr Hitler should make remarks which in' the present state of Europe cannot but have the most harmful effect. Perhaps the most! striking feature of the speech was the attack upon such Britons as Mr. Winston Churchill; Mr. Anthony Eden and Mr. Arthur Greenwood under the general contention that! there was a party in Britain desirous of war. That is most certainly not the - case. The men Herr Hitler har singled out for nek differed very strongly from the Prime Minister over the manner in which the task fof securing general European appeasement should be effected. They would no more thave recklessly launched Britain into a war than would Mr. Chamberlain, but their policy did envisage the following of lines, which in the opinion of many would have led to jan early outbreak of hostilities and all the evils attendant thereupon. It is a fact -that the greater the leaning towards pacifism the greater the danger of war had the policies of Great Britain been in the hands of men holding those views, but to suggest that these men are aggressively desirous of plunging Europe into war is to indicate a complete failure to understand British political trends. There is in Great Britain no more general desire for hostilities than there is in Germany, and the only real point at issue between Mr. Chamberlain and those at variance with him is as to what path shall be followed towards peace. To talk of a war party end to include within its ranks such men of diametrically opposed political views as the three mentioned above, and Mr. Duff Cooper, is to endeavour to conjure up a bogey which in fact does not exist.
Germany cannot expect any real move towards disarmament so long as sentiments such as those expressed by Herr Hitler are freely broadcast. It would be the height of foolishness if Great Britain, in face of such utterances, were again to indulge in that disarmament which but a few years ago left] her in such a state of unpreparedness that] British experts expressed the gravest possible concern. The grandiose scheme of rearmament, involving the tremendous cost of] £1,500,000,000 fs, it is reported to be supplemented by the further expenditure of some £900,000,000, It is possible that even this may have to be extended until no less than £3,000,000,000 will have been laid out. This: is being made necessary not only by the revelations made during the recent crisis of Britain's unpreparedness, but also because lup to the present there is really no sign of definitely improved relations, and unlikely to be as long as German leaders deliver themselves of the sentiments which they have been during this last month. What does the pact signed by Mr. Chamberlain and Herr Hitler, declaring against war between their two countries, really amount to when there! {sa repetition of just the type of pinpricking which arouses and aggravates resentment? Obviously, fine as the sentiment it testifies to may be, it can be of little worth so long as the parties thereto are not doing their: utmost to implement it. That there is a very. strong and determined opposition to Mr. Chamberlain, in the House of Commons, that) he is being very bitterly criticized by some his own supporters as well as the Opposition should have no real weight with Herr Hitler, for it must be apparent to him that the difficulties that democratic nations have in dealing with dictatorships are naturally supplemented by the difficulties dictators have in dealing with democracies. The complete variance between the two systems is something which sooner or later both types of government will have to take into considera~ tion, and the suoner it is done with a real and' sympathetic desire to understand, the better it will be for all concerned.
'Out of a perplexing situation this emerges quite clearly—there is very little likelihood Of all the eloquence of the German leaders' ringing about any change in the democratic structure of the British constitution, just as! Tittle as the chance of bringing about a change in the government of Germany by similar means, Democracies will still believe in that} freedom of that Press which Herr Hitler is! believed to consider intolerable. It will not for one moment be denied that a very considerable amount of comment which has ap~ peared in certain organs both in Great Britain and France and elsewhere in the world has had little to commend it, but great men should find nothing to complain of comment that is! fair and just. On that score there is something to be said for the astonishment expressed most certainly do nothing to curb Mr. Churchill, It might very well prove fruit ful of disaster if it tried, for while by insidious methods various British Governments have been seeking to circumscribe the activities of the British Press, without much public attention being given to} the matter, any plan for curbing the utterances of such pub be figures as the men whom Herr Hitler criticizes would arouse the greatest public indignation, If it were thought in Britain that such an attempt were being made to placate the ruler of another Power, the government attempting to do such a thing' would probably last only about long enough for the Prime Minister to resign. It is admitted that much has been said and written which should not have been, but it would be a very foolish British politician who sought to suppress an essential to the British Constitution so important and so jealously. regarded as freedom of speech,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.