Evening star., 1945-01-07

many" he has said. lis the en-
couragement, with all our power, of
the working-class forces of which
Hitler was essentially the execution
er hired by big business. the army
and the aristocracy. I think it is
folly to attempt the forcible decen-
tralization Of German govern
ment.
Little good is done to any one by
excitement over the vices of what
Lord Vansittart calls bad Germans.
The kind of thing he says about
them was said about England by
Thomas Jefferson after 1888, and
about France after 1889 at intervals
until the entente of 1905. 8"
Lord Noei-Buxton has joined with
Laski in warning against territorial
changes that may heap a harvest of
new wars. Writing in the October
issue of the Contemporary Review
published in London, he quoted
Winston Churchill in the latter's
book, Great Contemporaries: Hit
Ter, in his campaign, could point
continually to a. number of minor
anomolies and racial injustices in
the territorial arrangements OF
Europe, which fed the fires on which
he lived" NoeI-Buxton's articles,
'of course, was written before the
Prime Minister declared his support
OF Russia's claim to Eastern Poland
and of the plan to give Poland part
or all OF East Prussia, Pomerania
and Upper Silesia.
Noel-Buxton urged that the
United Nations be 'level-headed" in
its treatment of postwar Germany
and in time the Reich itself will
form provisional government
which the Allies can trust. Viscount
Cecil of Chelwood, winner of the
1887 Nobel Peace Prize. also writing
in the Contemporary Review, char
acterized the Germans as moral
robots" as now educated. but said
only two alternatives lie before the
Allies-complete determination or
conversion to decency. Since con-
version is the only practical course,
he went on, We must look to the
Germans for self-reformation, for
ut is as true morally as politically
that those who would be free, them
selves must strike the blow"
Perhaps the objective of both the
Vansittart and the Laski-N Noel -Bux-
ton schools Of thought has been best
expressed in England by the Arch
bishop of Canterbury when he said ::
THE treatment of Germany must be
such as to remove once and for all
the menace of German aggression,
and to secure full atonement for the
appalling sufferings inflicted by Nazi
Germany upon the peoples of
Europe. Yet We must not lend our
selves in mood of vengefulness to
breaches of basic human rights, or
to punitive measures against the
entire German people which will be
repudiated as unjust by later gen.
erations. or will permanently frus-
trate the hopes of peace and unity in
Europe"
While a basic cleavage exists in
Great Britain over the methods of
achieving this high ideal, it is evi-
dent that in the end the British
proposals for long-range plan will
represent a form of compromise be-
tween extremists at both ends. What
emerges from the welter of debate
and controversy are strong indica-
tions that Great Britain, like the
United States, will formally favor
full occupation of the Reich for an
indefinite period; scientific control
of key industries, with especial en-
phasis on the Ruhr and Rhineland
areas; boundary readjustments but
not violent dismemberment; con-
troll of imports and exports, and a
program of re-education designed to
enable Germany ultimately to take
It's place in peaceful, civilized So
ciety.
printed by Special Advancement with the
st. Louis PoSt-Dispatch.)