Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-02-24
ANGLO-AMER|CAN
STATUS EXPLAINED
lnaction on Navy Farley Un-
til Administrations Change
Held Peace Aid.
BY HAROLD E. SCARBOROUGH.

ok ntAhOAD
ny Radio to The Star.
LONDON, February est has be-
come an almost commonplace Of
Anglo American affairs that tempo
rary misunderstanding between two
nations often result in producing
totally unexpected display of real sem
timent that binds them-perhaps more
strongly than could any formal under
standing. Thus, while last Summer
Anglo French naval compromise of up
happy memory held the front pages of
the British papers for several weeks,
today for one Englishnan who could
recall for you any one provision OF this
agreement there are ten who would
remember that before the affair was
forgotten almost universal sentiment
had developed in this country to the
effect that the United States had not
square deal therein.
A somewhat similar reaction now is
@eveloping as result Of the most recent
incident having to do with the limi-
tation of naval armament. When last
week Sir Esnle Howard was quoted as
foreshadowing an early naval confer
ence, official London circles we're
amazed, and on Saturday there was
given out by the foreign Office state
ment declaring it was unlikely anything
would be done for some time to come.
This was, of course, virtually direct
contradiction of the Ambassadors pre-
diction-although efforts since have
been made to gloss over the apparent
divergence OF opinion. But n-Slr
Austen Chamberlain averred on
Wednesday-there is no contradiction,
why should Sir Esme have needed to
explain that he was giving only per-
sCnal opinion in his original statement?
Explanation Ingenious.
The foreign secretary's explanation
Shat he was correcting the incorrect
differences drawn from the AmbaSsa-
doris remarks rather than the remarks
Themselves ingenious. But it loses
weight when it is considered that on
ether occasions the British government
can show itself Sublimely indifferent to
what differences, if any, may be drawn
from the words of its spokesman. The
fact of the matter of course, is that
while many people here expect the
year 1929 will bring forth some sort of
conference on naval limitations they
realize that at the moment the Bald
win government has neither time nor
incentive for calling fresh conference.
And many sincere protagoniStS of
Anglo American friendship here feel
that this is just as well. Nobody sus-
poets either Baldwin or Chamberlain of
enti-American feeling. But both are
deeply committed so long as the pres
ent cabinet lasts to a policy along
which there is no possibility of agree
ment with the United States.
In these circumstances they render a
service, rather than disservice, to the
cause Of international peace by abstain
ing from action until both this country
end the United States have new adj
ministrations in working order. How
ever. in this case, as in the case of the
Angio-French compromise, public SYM
pathy has been clearly in opposition to
the foreign secretary's policy, and the
dominant tone in the comments of
many papers early this week was one
Of sorrow that it was the foreign Offices
policy, rather than the Ambassadors,
which would be pursued in the imme-
date future. But the foreign Office
naturally takes the tone of the govern
ment of which it is a part, and there
need be no apprehension in the United
States lest in good time the British
government should not be found will
ing to cooperate on a settlement of
the question which now forms the chief
point OF difference between the two
countries.
Copyright, 1921