THE MANDATES.
THE handling of the mandates by the Government has been extraordinarily unsatisfactory. The nation is in bewilderment, not knowing who is the real author of a mandate or with whom the final responsibility rests. Colonel Amery in the debate in the House of Commons on Thursday, March 24th, laid the blame on the wording of the Covenant. But though the Covenant—like most treaties, alas !—is a little vague, there is no excuse for the Government. As things are, the Government are doing a double disservice to us all : first they are attempting to assert a doctrine which is a challenge to the absolute power of the House of Commons over money matters, and secondly they are attributing to the League of Nations a degree of authority, or rather of sovereignty, which it does not possess and which it cannot have attributed to it without being brought into disrepute. As convinced supporters of the League, or at least of something resembling the League, we desire to make a strong protest.
The only words in the Covenant of the League of Nations referring to. the drafting of mandates are as follow : " The degree of authority to be exercised by the mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the members of the League, be explicitly defined in each case by the Council." Obviously, these words are not designed to prevent the Parliaments of the various countries which are members of the League from fully discussing the terms of a mandate before the country decides to accept that mandate. Yet Mr. Boner Law and in a higher degree Lord Curzon have developed a theory that our Parliament need not be con- sulted. They apparently look upon mandate-making as a kind of old-fashioned diplomacy which is a matter for a few experts. We are not at all hard-and-fast believers in publicity for all diplomatic transactions ; on the contrary, we believe that if ordinary diplomacy were conducted in open debate, with the newspapers behind the various parties accusing their delegates of weakness or cowardice or want of foresight, diplomats, so far from behaving in a statesmanlike or conciliatory manner, would be driven into frenzies of folly and chauvinism. But, as Lord Robert Cecil said in the House on March 24th, publicity is of the very essence of the League. In the making of ordinary treaties directly between nations, it is enough that there should be publicity when the treaties have been completed. There should, in fact, be no such thing as a secret treaty. But in all the dealings of the League, one of whose functions is to act as a registrar of treaties; there should be publicity. The League will make no progress unless all its doings are discussed and it receives the support of public opinion at every stage. In a recent debate in the House of Lords, Lord Curzon stated that in his opinion it would not be compatible with the position of the Council of the League if the man- dates were thrown upon the table of Parliament and then handed over to the League in whatever state they might emerge from criticism. He also stated his opinion that it would be equally undesirable for Parliament to pull a mandate to pieces after the Council of the League had accepted it. He pointed out that the mandate of Mesopo- tamia, for example, had been submitted to many person in this country and had been shown to the French 'and to the Italians. As Lord Islington remarked in a letter to the Times, " every authority is apparently worthy of consideration except Parliament ! "
It is only too easy to imagine what may happen if Parliament and, through Parliament, the country are not consulted about the nature of our mandates. One fine day at the fag-end of a Session a Cabinet Minister will present a mandate to the House and declare that the pressure of business is so great that there are only a few hours, if any at all, for discussing it. He may also declare that, as the mandate has already been approved by the Council of the League, it will be impossible to go back upon it without a breach of faith. We can imagine the fire and eloquence with which the Prime Minister would enlarge upon such a theme, and we can also estimate with some confidence the entranced majority which would troop into the Lobby behind him when he had brought off another of his oratorical triumphs. Yet all the time the House of Commons would be consenting to let the control of money matters pass out of its hands.
Many millions of money are being spent in Mesopotamia and Palestine. We do not know who has drawn up the mandates. Perhaps some Oriental experts in the one case and a few distinguished Jews in the other. The only right policy is that Parliament should discuss and sanction mandates before they are presented for the approval of the Council of the League. Of course the Council might refuse the mandate as presented, and it would then be for Parliament to say whether it could accept the modifications suggested by the Council. It is above all important to make it clear that the League is not a super-state which has the power to thrust mandates upon any country. A mandatory power is a trustee, and nobody can be compelled to assume the responsible duties of a trustee against his will. If the Government follow their present course they will make it appear that the League of Nations, by in effect decreeing the form of mandates, has indirectly the power to control policy in various countries. Here is a real interference with sovereignty. Here is the theory of a super-state which all who desire the success of the League of Nations must condemn. How can we fairly say to America that she is being haunted by a bogy when she talks about being asked " to surrender her sovereignty to a super-state," when our Government act as they are acting now 1 We sincerely hope that Parliament will consider this matter as soon as possible, for it is urgent. Probably the best plan would be for the House of Commons to insist that the mandates should be referred to a Select Committee. When the Select Committee reported, the House of Com- mons would have sufficient direction for debating the whole subiect and forcing the Government to retrace their steps.
Previous page
