We agree with M. Briand, and we note with satisfaction
that the critical importance of the present controversy is appreciated in this country, at least. It has been under- lined by several letters in the Times and the Manchester Guardian. Mr. Philip Kerr's letter, which we mentioned last week, provoked Lord Cecil to a reply. Lord Cecil, howeVer, missed the point. He became seized with the idea that those who are pleading for very careful think- ing before marrying the Covenant to the Pact are merely fearful lest such a union might displease those Americans who distrust Europe and all its ways and look upon the League as a European institution. Pro- fessor Gilbert Murray wrote a letter to the Manchester Guardian of Monday further obscuring the issue, on the assumption that Mr. Philip Kerr, and those who sup- port him, are on the side of the isolationist devils who are always conjuring up the bogy of " extending British responsibilities." Mr. Kerr made it clear on Wednesday that his objection is simply to putting the emphasis on the military " sanctions " under Article 16 of the Covenant.
* * * *