FOREIGN POLICY AND THE LEAGUE [To the Editor of THE
SPECTATOR.] SIR,—However well-deserved and popular the elevation of Mr. Eden to Cabinet rank may be, is there not some danger in the appointment of two Cabinet Ministers to deal with foreign affairs ? It is natural that the increased work of the Foreign Secretary should be divided and delegated, and this has hitherto been effected by the employment of the Lord Privy Seal, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State at Geneva and elsewhere.
• But to entrust the conduct of the foreign policy of this country to two Cabinet Ministers, one being Foreign Secretary and the other dealing with League of Nations affairs, seems to imply that the foreign policy of the country can be divided into League matters and non-League matters, and that the non-League matters, being entrusted to the Secretary of State, are regarded as more important. Surely, if member- ship of the League is the basis of British foreign policy, it is the-Secretary of State who should be primarily concerned with League affairs, and the -Prime Minister's new device may lead, not, as he intends, to greater emphaiis on League membership and on the rights and duties that it implies, but to the dangerous conclusion that there is a province
of our foreign policy, and that the major province, which has nothing to do with the League at all.—Yours, &c.,
119 Barlow Moor Rd., Didsbury. LEONARD F. BEHRENS.
Previous page
