AMERICA AND BRITAIN.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—Will the Spectator allow an American to make a few comments on Mr. Strachey's admirable article in the July 7th issue on " Mr. Page : America and Britain " ? I am led to ask for this privilege for two main reasons ; first, because the ideals of the editor of the Spectator and of those who associate themselves with these ideals are quite necessary if a real rapprochement is to be achieved ; and secondly, because I see, as an American who earnestly desires a better feeling between America and England, insuperable obstacles in the way of more cordial relations. As an American I must confess that England is for the moment more magnanimous than is America, and that this latest manifestation, the
memorial to Mr. Page, was a really splendid symbol of English good will. The memorial, of course, was more than appreciation for the late Ambassador, and was, in fact, an expression of the gratitude of English men and women for the services given by American men and women during an extremely acute period, of the War. The memorial is placed in Westminster Abbey, and at the dedicatory exercises the English people were represented by their highest personages and most noble characters. The eulogist was Lord Grey of Fallodon, a statesman who is well and favourably known on this side. In every phase of the dedication one saw the earnest desire for good will and friendship.
But how did America receive this message ? Brief descriptions of the ceremony in the Abbey were published in the papers of New York, Boston and Philadelphia, but in Chicago, even in the Tribune, only such mention was made as is usually made of unimportant European news. In the Pacific Coast cities the matter was ignored entirely. If, therefore, wellmeaning Englishmen were hoping that their expression of gratitude would evoke a corresponding expression from this side, then the painful truth that the Abbey ceremony was a failure must be recorded. This failure is due in part to the lack of interest in the late Ambassador, for, whatever Mr. Page's gifts may have been, he never touched the popular imagination. This indifference was not due to either Irish or German influence, but was an attitude of mind which had its inception and whole strength in the native American group. Mr. Page, therefore, as a medium for Anglo-American understanding, was undoubtedly the poorest mean that could be taken. But when one considers that Lord Grey placed the memorial beyond the simple device of an honour to an individual and did in fact extend the hand of fellowship to the whole American nation, it might be assumed that the splendid symbol would have been accepted in a better spirit. On the part of many Americans this is a cause of present chagrin—and future despair. We, of course, know that Mr. Strachey and those who are walking in his vision are doing much to bind the English-speaking nations. We know, also, that under present conditions this desideratum is as .distant now as it was during the days of our Civil War, and that no overtures from England will be likely to change this situation. And the American attitude, and I think this fact is hardly realized by even such well-informed men as Mr. Strachey, is due to the accentuated nationalism of native Americans. This group, by far the largest and most influential in America, is so jealous of our national integrity that it cannot receive even ordinary courtesies without suspecting ulterior motives.
As to the other causes which breed distrust, and even hatred, it is not necessary to make extended mention at this time. Well-informed Englishmen know full well the peculiarities of our many racial groups, and among these groups are those who bear an age-old grudge against England. Time may dispel them, and then again the events of a future time may rekindle old and torpid animosities. But even if we discount these elements we must always keep in mind our distinctly national group. It is this group which is freest from prejudice and also the most prone to gauge accurately the policies of other nations. When, therefore, it sees England disregarding the advice of such zealous peace advocates as Mr. Strachey, and circumventing peace conventions by expending millions of money on Singapore, it naturally inquires why a friendly nation adds to the war menace by erecting war defences. We understand your grievous unemployment, your enormous tax burdens, your loss of world trade, and deeply sympathize with the trials and difficulties which these conditions entail. Why, therefore, should it be deemed necessary or expedient to flout the good opinion of a nation which at heart desires that you should maintain your place as a contented and prosperous nation ?
To the editor of the Spectator I must make apology for writing at this length. The matter of more cordial relations is such a fruitful and engrossing theme that I think the statement of an interested American may be of some value, more particularly when this view does not coincide with the usual run of American opinion, or at least that American opinion which must accommodate itself to the courtesies of formal occasions, and which sometimes finds expression in English periodicals. This latter is not American opinion, and if wellmeaning Englishmen are accepting it as such then it is little w Index that Anglo-American relations are so frequently strained. We, on the other hand, are in the same difficulty as regards English opinion. Only the educated classes keep in touch with English affairs, and quite frequently their sources of information are of such doubtful integrity that the average man withholds judgment simply because of lack of faith in his source of supply. To those Americans who read English reviews the case is somewhat different. We know that these periodicals are reaching out to the intellectual classes, and so must in necessity appeal to the intelligence rather than to the emotions of their public. As Mr. Strachey says, we do not condemn you because of your State Church, your peerage, or your lack of a decimal system, but we do hope to see the day when the altruists of both countries can meet on common ground and without the feeling that behind this great democratic movement there lurk these old and archaic systems.— I am, Sir, &c., JAMES P. LORING. 22 Chestnut Street, Boston, Mass., U.S.A.
Previous page
