MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sia,—In your issue of November 17th there appeared an article by Mr. Ramsay MacDonald on " The Purpose of an Opposition." This was prefaced by a note of warm approval by yourself, on the ground that " his article is an assurance that we are free from revolutionary methods so long as the leadership of Labour rests where it is." Nothing, indeed, could be more correct than the tone of this letter, with its Insistence on the necessity for a recognized official Opposi- tion. But what, I am sure, many of your readers would like to know is, how does Mr. MacDonald reconcile this con- stitutional attitude with his membership of the International and his appointment as one of the delegates sent by the British Labour Party to the Labour and Socialist Congress (International) at Hamburg in the May of this year ? The Congress resolutions state that " The Labour and Socialist International can only become a reality if its decisions in all international questions are binding on its affiliated bodies " (including, of course, the British Labour Party). " The resolutions of the International will therefore imply a self- imposed limitation of the autonomy of the affiliated organiza- tion." Mr. MacDonald may possibly be called upon to form a Government. In that case, will he consider himself bound by his pledge of loyalty to the King and Constitution, or by his pledge to the International ?
As his letter appeared with your commendation, it would seem to be due to your readers that some explanation by Mr. MacDonald of an apparent inconsistency should also appear in the Spectator.—I am, Sir, &c., IL C. W.
Previous page
