Every paper has a right to its own opinions, but
I am bound to say I read with surprise, as well as regret, the Daily Telegraph's leading article on the League of Nations on Tuesday, constituting as it did an elaborate disparage- ment of the League such as almost to arouse fears that the tail-end of the Daily Telegraph and Morning Post may start wagging the dog. The article was wrong (in my view) in both proportion and fact. It is wholly inaccurate, for example, to say that " the United States had stood severely aloof from the first." As The Times pointed out with justice in a leader of its own the next day, though the United States has never actually joined the League, " American delegates are prominent members of the International Labour Office and of all those non-political bodies whose sole concern is the betterment of the social and material conditions of the human race." A comparison between the two articles reveals the close relation of the second to the first. The Times leader-writer has evidently studied the work of his Telegraph colleague with some diligence, and follows him point by point with a different—and in my view much juster —interpretation of the same events.
* * * *
Previous page
