The Wilmington morning star., 1944-04-14
TODAY and TOMORROW
By WALTER LIPPMANN

by w AL -
The highest praise one can give
to Mr.. Hull's speech is to say that
there would be little serious crit
ism, and much less to criticize, if
at reasonably regular intervals he
had given such a public account
ing.
On Sunday evening he came
down from the pedestal of his gen.
eral principles and talked, not as
a moral lawgiver to mankind but
as the American Secretary of
State. The effect was persuasive
and reassuring, and if Mr.. Hull
will continue to render an account
ing he will earn confident sup
port among the people. He will
earn it not by fine words but be-
cause the Administration will
make many less mistakes that are
difficult to explain if it knows that
it is going to have to explain them.
That is an important reason why
democracy is good form of gov
eminent.
Foreign policy has been under
fire from three directions. 1t has
been charged that the Administra-
ton is reactionary, and that in
Spain, France, and Italy it ap-
peases and prefers to support re-
dictionary Fascist elements. In the
last analysis it was not true that
the President and Mr.. Hull ever
intended to do that, but con-
fused administration of diplomacy
often lent color to the charge. 1t
has also been charged that they
were defaulting on their moral
principles and were not getting on
with the work of establishing the
organization promis-
ed at Moscow and approved in the
Connally and Fulbright resolutions.
What Mr.. Hull had to say about
the Atlantic Charter and about the
process of reaching agreement at
home with Congress and abroad
with out allies was, it seemed to
me, wise and true account of
the problem and how to proceed
with it.
The criticism which Mr. Hull
did not deal with is that the prac-
teal conduct and administration
of our foreign affairs is not CO.
herent and efficient. Yet that is
where the real trouble lies. We
have just had a vivid example.
At his press conference on Fri
day morning of last week, having
read and approved what Mr.. Hull
was going to say on Sunday about
France, the President himself
talked about France. A casuist
could, l suppose, reconcile the two
statements. But to the ordinary
man here and abroad the Presi-
dent seemed to be going in one
whereas his Secretary of
State went in a very different d.
rection. This is incoherence in the
conduct of diplomacy.
What Mr.. Hull said was that we
would do advanced planning"
with the French Committee of Ma
tional Liberation so that it could
establish "swiftly'' the civil ad-
of liberated France.
1t would be subject to the super
vision of General Eisenhower, but
Mr.. Hull defined this supervision
exactly by saying that General Els
enhower would be interested only
in those affairs which are nee
essary for military operations
against the enemy" The commit
tee, while not a government, y
would be the civil authority In
France which made the arrange
ments for elections and the like
bv which the French nation could
establish constitutional govern
ment.
If this policy had been an
and adopted many weeks
ago when the War Department,
the State Department. the mill
tary commanders, the British gov
eminent and all the other United
Nations had agreed that it was the
right policy, the whole confusion
about American policy in France
would have been dissolved. What
MIR. Hull said on Sunday evening
was the whole substance of what
the serious critics were asking
for.
But, unhappily, the Presidents
remarks on Friday have to be ex-
planned away before Mr.. Hulrs
statement can clear the air. MIR.
Roosevelt said that nobody out
side of France knows what the
people inside France want. That
may be true. But it is irrevelant
and wholly beside the main point