LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
FRANCE AND THE RUHR. [To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
have read with interest the correspondence in your
columns on France and the Ruhr, as well as your able and courageous articles on the same subject. Your correspondents
have stated very fully the French case as seen through French eyes, but I have failed to find in their letters any appreciation of the British case. Yet that case is deserving of consideration, for it not only involves the honour and interests and traditions
of the English nation, but the welfare of Europe and the fate of our civilization. I do not waste space in discussing the French claims or French ambitions. It is sufficient if I say that the French nation and their Allies—Belgium; Poland and the Little Entente—now stand for the reign of militarism
in Europe, for the reign of violence, and for the maxim that might is right. These are not British interests ; on the contrary, they stand for a political and international system which we have during our history always fought to destroy, our latest effort having been the destruction of the reign of militarism and the rule of force or violence as practised by the Government of the deposed Kaiser. We did not destroy one military despotism to set up another in its place, nor can we ally ourselves with a nation which rejects the principle of arbitration in an international dispute and to all remon-
strances replies sic volo sic jubeo.
The policy of England and the tradition of England have been clearly and nobly stated by our present Prime Minister. He said :-
" We shall all of us—the nations of our Empire and the United States—in our several ways, while each pursuing our own develop- ment to the uttermost of our power, come to unite whenever justice calls us throughout the world and wherever there is peace to be ensured."
There can be no peace and no security so long as one part of Europe is disarmed and the other half armed to the teeth. Does any man suppose that France is now in danger from a bankrupt and disarmed Germany or that peace is secured by acts which provoke a war of revenge ? Does any man suppose that law or justice are supported by a nation which rejects arbitration ? Surely we can have no part or lot in such a policy, and unless the impossible happens and there is a complete reversal of French policy, the " common front " would be a disaster and a derogation—a disaster to our interests, a derogation from the noblest traditions of the British peoples. Arbitrator if you will, mediator if you will ; but participant in wrongdoing—never.—I am, Sir, &c.,
GRAHAM BOWER.
Studwell Lodge, Droxford, Hants.
Previous page
