THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS UNION
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—In your issue of January 4th you printed a letter from Captain Pelham Burn, complaining that the Union had not succeeded in maintaining its character as a " non party organisation " ; and in an editorial note you expressed a doubt whether this " charge " could be substantiated in view of the " very genuine desire at the headquarters of the L.N.U. that it shall be entirely non-party."
No one who knows anything of the able and devoted group of publicists who direct the Union can question the sincerity of that desire. The question is whether, as the affairs of the Union are at present conducted, it can be realized. There are very many people whom it is terribly difficult to convince that "politics" has any meaning apart from party politics. Now a certain line of League policy is put forward as " the policy of the Union " : it may have nothing whatever to do with the principles which distinguish one of our political parties from another, but it happens that it is rejected by one of them and accepted by another. Does not the average citizen naturally conclude that the Union attaches itself to the latter and not to the former party ? Hence it is probable that the Union, which is the only organization for the vast educational work necessary to effect a complete revolution in thought and feeling, loses the support of thousands who are convinced, or prepared to be convinced, of the soundness of the principles of the League, but who are unwilling to commit themselves to policies which seem to nail a " party " brand—or, it may be, to smack of the wrong party.
It is understood that the Executive have appointed a committee to review the entire organization of the Union in the light of ten years' experience. May it be hoped that this committee will give due consideration to the widespread feeling to which Captain Pelham Burn has given expression, as well as to the other causes which are preventing the Union from representing a truly " national " movement ? We were told recently that its membership increases at about the rate of two thousand a week : but a merely " arithmetical " progression is hardly satisfactory, seeing that each new member should bring in others ; nor, again, does it seem well that the Union should have to diminish its expenditure, whereas, of course, with due regard to economical manage- ment, it should rather be increasing it to meet the needs of expansion.
May I add a word of apology for this letter ? On the agenda of the December Council meeting appeared a resolution censuring those who send their criticisms of the Union to the Press instead of bringing them before a meeting of the Council. Any obscure country member, like myself, who has tried unsuccessfully to obtain a hearing at a Council meeting, knows that, apart from other difficulties, that body is, for purposes of practical discussion, of unwieldy size ; while if all or most of the branches sent representatives it is hard to see what would happen. Here, again, there seems to be matter for enquiry.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
