An appreciable change has taken place during the past few months in the way in which the American public assesses the character of the British Prime Minister, Mr. Neville Chamberlain. His policies are looked upon with far more favour and his objective are better understood, He started with little in his favour as far as the American public was concerned.
During the time he acted as Chancellor of the Exchequer he was associated with the failure to pay war debts and some entirely justified, if not particularly diplomatic, comments made by him on the mentality of the Middle West.with regard to international problems in general and the war debts in particular rankled, and were continually being recalled.
Then on top of this came the Cabinet split over foreign policy with Mr, Eden, who (being young, handsome and idealistic) had Become a personality who was popular even if the precise points in which he differed from the Prime Minister were little understood.
But Mr. Chamberlain has now lived down this early attitude of indifference and, at] times, hostility. The reason for the change could be summed up in a sentence. He appears to be making an attempt to give conscious guidance to events towards a well-defined goal instead of letting matters drift. The Anglo-Italian agreement, followed by! the Anglo-Irish and the ' Anglo-French agreements in quick succession, made a deep impression in the United States.
Action had taken the place of inaction. Something was being done to prevent the drift in Europe towards two hostile camps. 'The Administration began to appreciate the worth of the Chamberlain policy before the general public, and. the President broke all' precedent by publicly endorsing the Anglo-Italian agreement in a formal statement, Since the days of George Washington, who warned his countrymen that Europe had a set of primary interests which "to us have none or a very remote interest" the United States. Government has taken particular care not to take any part in Europe's political affairs, The President, therefore, prefaced his re~ marks with a restatement of this traditional position, The United States Government, he said, "Does not attempt to pass on the political features of accords such as that recent~ ly reached between Britain and Italy."
Having made this reservation the President then went as far as was politically possible in approving Mr. Chamberlain's policy. "This Government has seen the conclusion of an agreement with sympathetic interest because it is proof of the value of peaceful negotiations, 'The importance of the President's state~ ment was immediately recognized. It was praised by many, criticized by some. It apears to have' caused consternation in English opposition circles who had been basing much of their case against the Government on the assumption that it had inated" American public opinion and embarrassed the American Government by its attempts to come to terms with the authoritarian states.
Yet here was the head of the American Government saying that these verbally' castigated negotiations had proved the value of peaceful negotiations. In a debate on the Italian agreement Mr, Herbert Morrison sugested that the Prime Minister should not quote the remarks of President Roosevelt with such unction for they were merely a routine gesture such as one government often makes to another. American opinion does not bear out Mr. Morrison's contention. Nobody has considered the remarks routine and many exercised their ingenuity in sug~ gesting reasons why they had been made.
One suggestion was that Mr. Roosevelt had become irritated at the way in which the British Opposition parties had used sim as a stick to beat the Government, Mem~ bers of these parties had called upon him ut the White House and had been listened to with courteous attention and then had given the impression that the President had agreed with the position they had outlined. The opposition press also had over-reached itself in outlining what purported to be the President's hostile reaction to the policy of the British Government.
Another suggestion was that some species of intrigue had taken place between the British Government and a section of the permanent staff in the State Department. A letter, ran one version of the story, had been written personally by Mr. Chamberlain to Mr, Sumner Welles, Under-Secretary of State, asking him to persuade the President to issue the statement, This tale was repeated in such a widespread fashion that the permanent officials of the Department] finally had to take note of it and deny it categorically.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.