The Waterbury Democrat., 1944-02-10

cessor as prime minister in the coalition government.
 But if a tragic loss of Churchill were met by demand for a gen. eral election, Conservative leaders themselves believe that the party might not be able to retain enough seats to put Eden into the prime ministership.
 Of all the factions whose leaders I have seen, the natural beneficiary of a demand for change would be the Labor party. But jealousies between leaders, along with a con- spicuous lack of singlemindedness among the membership to support Herbert Morrison, Ernest Bevin or anyone else, weakens the Labors party's ability to turn its natural strategic advantages into seats.
 In this situation, Sir Stafford Cripps would have been political blessing to the Labor party. But on entering Churchill's coalition government as an opposition stimu- lant and 8 catalytic agent, Cripps proceeded to coalesce himself beyond the support of his rank-and- file. As he siackened his opposition role, Labor gradually said, Goodbye, MT. Cripps" And when this happened, the government itself didn't need him any longer. As Labor'S cham pion, he simply died on the vine.
 MUFFED SECOND CHANGE
 Even Churchill's close advisors agree that Cripps had late chance to revive Somewhat-if he had re- signed when Lord Beaverbrook re- gently came back into the govern ment. For Cripps originally had built much of his popularity by opposing Beaverbrook and by rid ing on the wave of the 1atter's gen. eral unpopularity. But when Church. i'll asked Beaverbrook to come back, Cripps declined to take the leap. He hung on, and now is politically buried in the ministry of aircraft production.
 As result, the Labor party's parliamentary leaders admit that they have no effective political leader. So the party lacks 8 sense of direction which otherwise could win 1t control of the British gov- ernment at the first general elec- tion.
 It would be mistake to interpret England's desire for a change, and the grass-roots strength of labor, as meaning anything like the left ward swing which Americans might imagine. Laborites themselves agree that their party and England as a whole are further from Communism today than at any time.
 Communistic sentiment reached a peak here with the military climax at Stalingrad, at which time sophis- ticated pamphleteers and others tried to carry Russian victories into Brit ish home politics. But this scheme fell flat, and the frail theological bridge of that time has long since collapsed. An application by con- munists to join the labor party then was refused. It since has been repeated and again refused, with the result that the Communists have no place to go politically. Labor's attitude also has set adrift extreme left-wingers of all types, whose and junkets to America imply an effectiveness which is totally lacking here on the spot. LIBERAL NOT RADICAL
 ''Thirty-six great liberal move ments have made England strong in the past" Ebby Edwards. leader of the Miners Federation of Great Britain, told me at the miners union headquarters today. '"The trend to- ward liberalism continues to run strong in England. but the process is evolutionary rather than revolu- tionary. It is typically British, and its portrayal abroad as something new and radical is a deliberate dis tortion. The liberal movement is as clearly traditional and slow as ever, and if Americans letter understood British temperament they would know that 1t hardly could be other- wise"
 On this point. from the Conserva. tive side, an interesting observa- tion was made to me tonight by Lady Nancy Astor. famed Virginia-born member of parliament for 26 years. She said: "Our men are having @ good look at the lives and hopes of others living beyond our shores just as are today's American troops. When our men return, they say that England is a pretty good place after all. They feel that enough around this world has been uprooted for