MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S LEADERSHIP
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR]
SIR,—The more one thinks about it the more one realises how much the international situation has deteriorated since Mr. Chamberlain became Prime Minister. One was at first inclined to sympathise with him for having to try and clear up the mess, so to speak, made by his predecessors in office (some people seem to forget that it was the Baldwin-Eden deplorable policy over Abyssinia that started the Axis), but now one wonders whither Mr. Chamberlain is leading this country, and whether he is really doing his best to avert the catastrophe that hangs over the world. Why the delay in coming to a concrete agreement with Russia? Why the delay in creating a Ministry of Supply?—and in this connexion it is pertinent to express regret at Mr. Burgin's appointment. Why not Mr. Winston Churchill, who is essentially a man of action, and would have been a much more popular choice? Why the delay in sending a trade delegation to Rumania? It should have been sent before Germany had been able to get a strangle-hold on the valuable resources of that country. Above all, why the delay in making compulsory National Service? For all their plausibility, the Government cannot explain away the fact that hundreds of thousands of men are still needed for the defence forces—and are likely to remain so until service is made compulsory. Is Mr. Chamberlain really blind to the "writing on the wall," or is he wilfully shutting his eyes and still clinging in his heart to his pet " appeasement " theory? Does he not yet realise that he was fooled by Hitler, fooled himself over Spain, and is now being fooled by Mussolini? One begins to wonder if the safety of the British Empire would not be more secure in hands other than those of Mr. Chamberlain and his smug satellites.—I am, Sir, yours
faithfully, M. F. THORNTON. The Mill House, Westwell, Kent.
Previous page
