THREE DISSATISFIED NATIONS
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I welcome Mr. P. C. Loftus' letter in your issue of November 26th. But he need not have appealed to the League of Nations Union to "reverse its policy" in order to "place the redress of grievances in the foreground" and to "recognise that Article 19 of the Covenant is inoperative." More than ten years have elapsed since the late Lord Phillimore helped the Union to devise a means of making Article 19 of the Covenant practicallreffective for the redress of national grievances by process of peaceful change. The essentials of that plan were approved and adopted last June by the Inter- national Federation of League of Nations Societies, meeting in Czechoslovakia. That the Union has at last persuaded its sister societies of the little Entente to accept our point
of view in this mattcr will, I feel sure, be welcome news to Mr. Loftus. , •
The most recerit statement published by the League of Nations Union on this subject is a Manifesto adopted by the General Council of the Union six months ago, to the effect that : "The League of Nations Union is aware that no system for enforcing peace can succeed so long as the peace is felt in any quarter to be unjust, and no machinery is set up to remedy that injustice."
Indeed, the Union's speakers are never tired of declaring that the maintenance of peace requires not only that the law should be enforced, but also, and first of all, that the law should be altered from time to time so as always to be just.—Your The Athenaeum, Pall Mall, S. IV. r.