MR. HARDING'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS.
.1-T is not very edifying to read in several English Liberal 11 newspapers chilly criticisms of President Harding's Inaugural, interpreting it as-a .kind of Tory or reactionary statement. It seems to be a habit with some people to allow labelling to take the place of thinking ; when a derogatory label has once been fixed on some political speech or bill or movement everything goes on afterwards, from the point of view of the Liberal labellers, on the assumption that some malevolent retrograde policy is being deliberately imposed upon the world. There is a tacit tradition that British Liberals should sympathize with the American Democrats and not with the American Republicans. -A Republican would find it hard to please them whatever he might say or do. The title " Demo- crat " may possibly account for this tradition, though it -would be rather a puzzle, if one • examined the matter afresh, to say why Liberals here should think that they are more democratic than other British politicians and that they are the natural allies of democrats abroad. Really they are less democratic than Unionists, for resistance has more commonly come from them than from Unionists to such truly democratic proposals as the Poll of the People and Universal Military Service, which would put an end to privilege and would attach the obligation of bearing the brunt of war to the persons of all those who demanded war. Further, 'when such an utterly unconstitutional and undemocratic institution as the Council of Action was created, excuses were found for it by many Liberals, but, so far as we know, by not a single Unionist. We may not have suggested the right explanation, but the fact is clear enough that the tendency of British Liberals is to regard Mr. Harding's address as a falling away from the vivifying radiance of Mr. Wilson's idealism. They write as though the world must consent to a stagnant period or a political hibernation of four years. Now, we venture to say that this estimate of the situation is as far from the truth• as it can possibly be. We hope it will not be misunderstood by American Republicans and taken as a sign that we do not really expect their co-operation. So far from not finding any tendency in Mr. Harding to negotiate with the Old World and to work something in the nature of a League of Nations, we find a very definite desire on his part to do these things. The facts that he is cautious, is very careful of American sovereignty, and shuns an access of ambition like poison are all to the good.
There are far greater possibilities in this attitude than there were in the attitude of Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson, having had no experience in the temper and methods of Europe—that 'woe no blame to him, as his country had kept itself scrupulously detached from European pohtics- believed that it would be possible to present the stupid and confused Old World with a completely new framework of international relations into which all the troubles of large and small . nations could be fitted so that, as in a • completed jig-saw puzzle, there would be no ragged edges. .Prom the first moment we were afraid that this was going too far, and the event has given only too much substance to our misgivings. A superstate, or something sufficiently like a super-state to be called one, was to be set up, and Mr. Wilson, without troubling to conciliate his political opponents, incidentally overlooked the fact that his proposal would clash with the American Constitution. Even though his methods were in themselves bound to raise up entice, he might nevertheless have done much to placate opposition if he had been blessed with such a manner as composes difficulties. But his habit of mind was unfortunately quite different. He displayed a kind of intellectual arrogance, a withering contempt for objec- tions raised by men most of whom were no doubt mentally much leas brilliant than himself, and his posture became that of an autocrat. The results were the wreck of his schemes—a wreck which in many respects we sincerely deplore, as every man of decent feelings must have found much to respond to and to admire in Mr. Wilson's soaring principles—and a wide revolt throughout America against the man who in the name of democracy had ruled as an autocrat.
In these circumstances it would not have been aston- ishing if Mr. Harding and his party had swung to the opposite, extreme. The salving by Mr. Harding of some of the most important of Mr. Wilson's principles, and his declaration that he believes those principles are workable, are the best signs which have come from America for a long time. We know now that Britain and America, without any question of an alliance, will be able to form such a union of understanding and goodwill that what may be called the Anglo-Saxon spirit will be the most important single influence in the world. If that comes about every- thing else desirable will follow. In building a house the first thing is to lay a good foundation, and..all politics is nothing but house-building carried out in a different material. is The supreme virtue of Mr. Harding's pro- gramme s that it tells us where we are. Nowhere in his address did he, in the Wilsonian manner, ask that the value of facts should be allowed to words and aspirations.
Some months ago, after reading a good deal of Republican literature, we predicted that the oreation of .a World Court for trying all international questions which might be justiciable would be oneof the most prominent Republican proposals. The prediction is fulfilled. But apart from the World Court, Mr. Harding makes the tremendously important offer to join in a conference for reducing armaments. How anybody who takes all the American circumstances into consideration, and is moreover blessed with an understanding of the gradual processes of the normal human mind with its instinctive preference of experience to theory, can pretend that Mr. Harding's profession of faith does not give us all the encouragement we need is past our comprehension. To us it seems as dear as daylight that America can be brought of her own will into an association of nations. Of course she cannot be brought in except on her own terms. Now that we know the terms in outline, however, they seem to us to be quite satisfactory.
In order that there may be no mistake about the wording -and the spirit of Mr. Harding's offer, let us quote from his address :— " Confident of our ability to work out our own destiny, and jealously guarding our right to do so, we seek no part in directing the destinies of the Old World. We do not mean to be entangled. We will accept no responsibility except as our own conscience and judgment, in each instance, may determine. Our eyes never will be blind to a developing menace ; our ears never deaf to the call of civilization. We recognize the new order in the world, with the closer contacts which progress has wrought. We sense the call of the human heart for fellowship, fraternity, and co-operation. We crave friendship, and harbour no hate. But America can be a party to no permanent military alliance. It can enter into no political commitments nor assume any economic obligations which will subject our decisions to any other than our own authority. We have no thought to impede the paths to closer relationship. We wish to promote understanding. We want to do our part in making offensive warfare so hateful that Governments and peoples who resort to it must prove the righteousness of their cause or stand as outlaws before the bar of civilization.
We are ready to associate ourselves with the nations of the world, great and small, for conference, for counsel, to seek the expressed views of world opinion, to recommend a way to approximate disarmament, and to relieve the crushing burdens 01 military and naval establishments. We elect to participate
in suggesting plans for mediation, conciliation and arbitration, and would gladly join in that expressed conscience of progress which seeks to clarify and write the laws of international relation- ship, and establish a world court for the disposition of such justiciable questions as nations are agreed to submit thereto. In expressing aspirations, in seeking practical plans, in trans- -lating humanity's new concept of righteousness and justice and its hatred of war into recommended action, we are ready most heartily to unite, but every commitment must be made in the exercise of our national sovereignty. A world super-Government is contrary to everything we cherish and can have no sanction by our Republic. This is not selfishness, it is sanctity It is not aloofness, it is security. America is ready to encourage, eager to initiate, anxious to participate in any seemly programme likely to lessen the probability of war, and promote that brother- hood of mankind which must be God's highest conception of human relationship. Mankind needs a world-wide benediction of understanding. It is needed among individuals, among peoples, among Governments."
The way is clearly pointed here to getting rid of the crushing burden of armaments. Navies and armies will, of course, be necessary for policing the world and for pre- senting the iiitinta ratio of force in the face of unruly members of civilized international society, but we may look - forward with confidence if we can agree with America— and only fools or madmen would fail to agree—to cutting out of our Budget the old excessive expenditure. If only we can come to an understanding there will be no cause for jealousy when America builds ships of war ; her ships will . be added to the aggregate of strength which keeps Peace upon her throne, and the more ships America builds the less will be the strain upon us.
We need pick out only two other things from the address. Although Mr. Harding referred to new tariffs he remarked that he recognized that " a country cannot sell where it cannot buy." We imagine, therefore, that his tariffs, if they see the light at all, will be very reasonable. The other point to which we must refer is Mr. Harding's touch of true democracy :— " There is something inherently wrong, something out of accord with the ideals of representative democracy, when one portion of our citizenship turns its activities to private gain amid defensive war while another is fighting, sacrificing, or dying for national preservation."
Surely that is excellently said. It displays that spirit of democracy which is often denied in this country but is the common type in the Dominions. In the Dominions it is taken for granted that if there is a severe or unpopular obligation—such as the obligation to bear arms in the defence of one's country—it should rest not on a few but upon all. If that had been an axiom here when the war began in 1914 there would not have been the least difficulty in arraying the whole British nation for service in the war. We should have been saved the growth of industrial privilege among the trade unionists who stayed at home, with its appalling legacy in the shape of jealousy, needlessly high prices, trade slump, and unemployment.
We sincerely trust that our Government will accept Mr. Harding's invitation without delay. He has given us a great opportunity in the best possible circumstances because it occurs at the beginning of his Presidential career. What ought to be done now is quite unlike most of our political problems in that it is perfectly simple. We have only got to set to work by joining in a disarmament confer- ence and by finding out in detail on what terms America will associate herself with other nations in conducting what may still be called the League of Nations.
Previous page
