THE TABLET A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER AND REVIEW

ESTABLISHED 1840 REGISTERED AS A NEWSPAPER

VOL. 171 No. 5103

LONDON FEBRUARY 26th, 1938

SIXPENCE

IN THIS ISSUE THOSE ITALIANS A Topical Dialogue by Christopher Hollis POLTERGEISTS AND THEIR WAYS

By Herbert Thurston, S.J.

THE MEANING OF CATHOLIC ACTION

By Henry Hope, K.C.S.G.

THE DEMOCRATIC WAR-MONGERS

An Editorial Full List o f Contents on page 260.

THE WORLD WEEK BY WEEK Mr. Chamberlain Takes Control

The details of the fine divergence between the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, as disclosed to the House last Monday, were concerned with whether or not the Italians were to be rebuffed. “ I was convinced,” said Mr. Chamberlain, ‘‘that a rebuff to the Italian expression of their desire that conversations should start at once would be taken by them as a confirmation of those suspicions which I have described, suspicions that we had never really been in earnest about the conversations at all. I thought that if that were the effect, the result would be disastrous. It would be followed by an intensification of anti-British feeling in Italy, rising to a point at which, ultimately, war between us might become inevitable.” Mr. Eden, on the other hand, ‘‘was unable to agree to any immediate decision and wished to say that the moment for the official opening of conversations had not arisen, and that we wished to wait until a substantial withdrawal of volunteers had taken place, ’’ and then Mr. Chamberlain went on, ‘‘But when I asked him whether, if such an acceptance could be obtained from the Italians, he would then be able to agree to the commencement of the conversations, he made it clear that his objections would still remain.” The Cabinet was accordingly summoned, and accepted Mr. Chamberlain’s view. The Italians have since, in fact, accepted the British Government’s formula for Spain, by which belligerent rights will be granted when a certain proportion of volunteers on both sides have been recalled. The conversations, which will be conducted between Lord Perth and Count Ciano, will now begin, and everything will turn on the spirit which the Ministers of both countries bring to them. Mr. Eden’s departure has taken place in a manner creditable alike to his colleagues and himself. It closes a two-year tenure of a most exacting and thankless office, and there has been no desire to introduce any needless criticism. But already he has been met with the wily blandishments of the Government’s opponents, but to them we trust he will pay little heed. The Tradition of the ’Twenties

The divergence of outlook and approach which finally separated Mr. Eden from his colleagues has also separated him from his fellow members supporting the Government in the present House. He embodies and represents the conceptions of an earlier period, of the years after the War when the strength of Britain and France was incomparably greater than that of an exhausted and fettered Germany or of Italy in its first Fascist years. It was possible then for the statesmen of the victorious countries to devise pacts and arrangements, and to lay down all sorts of conditions in return for successive lightenings of the German load. In essence the Foreign Secretaryship of Sir Austen Chamberlain consisted in gaming French assent for ameliorations of the German burdens. What was so misleading was the growth of the idea that the Versailles settlement constituted a real and solid framework, that the governments and frontiers and terms, including the League Covenant, which it produced, were somehow grounded in the nature of things. In fact, they represented the wills, often confused, contradictory and compromised, of the victors, the ideas of the French and British and American statesmen and their experts, working under greater pressure to hammer out some sort of settlement. The work was not on the whole badly done, and it rested on a broadly intelligible principle of nationality, modified at times by economic and strategic consideration. But it was an imposed settlement. Those who suffered by it accepted it under duress, but they naturally never in their hearts considered it as final : nor have they ever felt that force was rightly used once and for all then, and must never be used again, or that force must never undo any of the things