Was the French Prime Minister's journey, then, waste of time
? That by no means follows. The personal contacts between statesmen that have become so fashion- able in the last twelve months always do some good. Moreover, where no definite results were anticipated it is less than reasonable for the lack of results to create depression: M. Laval cannot do what he will with his Chamber nor Mr. Hoover what he will with his Congress. Neither was in a position to give pledges on disarmament or security. Both have to shape policy gradually and by whatever means may offer, and it would be altogether too pessimiiticio conclude that the Washington conversations will have no influence at all on the policy of the United States or of France in the next five or six months. As to security M. Laval may well be content with the role America has been playing at Geneva from the moment the League Council had the Manchurian affair before it. As to disarmament Mr. Hoover has less ground for satisfaction, particularly, if the report be true that the French Premier said his country could not accept the armaments truce recommended by the League Assembly. But both: Mr. Hoover and M. Laval are capable of withholding some parts of a private conversation from the Preis, and the full truth about their week-end is not necessarily known yet.
Previous page
