given to South Africans in London. In this letter, dated Nov. 15th, 1923, he wrote:

"The reparations question is rapidly becoming a vast moral question. It is no longer a question whether Germany can, and shall, pay reparations, but whether Germany shall live or whether she shall become a gaping wound in the body of Western civilization. When we are faced with a situation so terrible we can but do our duty. And our duty is clearly to go forward even if France does not march with us." And as a way to the solution of the problem which is destroying Europe he proposed that Great Britain should call a conference of the Powers interested in the reparations question, including the United States, and that even in the unfortunate event of France's refusing to join, such a conference should still be held.

He asked that the Conference should be called upon to examine the liability of Germany with regard to reparations with a view to finality, that it should devise means of setting German finance in order very much as had been done on the case of Austria, and that it should consider how real peace should be made in Germany.

The speech in which these proposals are elaborated is perhaps the most illuminating and penetrating exposé of the European situation that has been delivered by any statesman of the first rank. It called

for a resolute, determined diplomacy, for courage in handling a situation nearly desperate. It broke the tradition in official quarters of saying nothing but smooth platitudes on the disastrous policy of France in the Ruhr and the degrading position of Great Britain in failing to make any effective protest against that policy.

"Four or five years ago," he said, "we were singing our songs of victory; to-day we are all marching to certain and inevitable defeat-victor and vanquished alike. The international chaos is growing. The economic and industrial structure of Europe is cracking in all directions. Weariness and despair are sapping the morale of the peoples. Military hysteria is sapping their depleted financial resources. Everywhere you see armed men, everywhere gigantic armies, even among the small new States which cannot possibly afford them. In spite of the disappearance of the German Army there are now almost a million and a half more men under arms than in August, 1914. ("Shame!") The black hordes of Africa have been called in to redress the moral and political balance of this mother-continent of civilization. ("Shame!") The human principles are everywhere derided and degraded. The standards of living for the peoples are everywhere sinking to lower levels. Famine for large numbers is not far off. Can we

continue much longer on this march to destruction, this pilgrimage, this crusade of suicide on which Europe has started? ("No, no!").

And in speaking of the Conference which should be called to consider how the destruction of European civilization should be averted he appealed to America to be a member of it and to carry her full weight. The appeal to the United States, he said, is not so much for material assistance as for moral support in this dark hour. "It is the lack of moral justice, he said, "which is Europe's undoing. The peoples of Europe have faith in America, they believe in her impartial justice, and they feel that without the reinforcement of her moral idealism Europe has no longer the strength to save herself."

But

This great and courageous appeal seemed as if it might arouse Great Britain to that "resolute and determined diplomacy" which he advocated. the voice was forgotten in the hubbub of a general election in which the citizens of Great Britain were asked, not to strengthen the hands of the Govern ment for the salvation of Europe, but to equip them with the power to build a tariff wall against the handiwork of Europe's laboring men.

As the result of the moral leadership which General Smuts established at the Imperial Conference in 1923 there was a widespread wish expressed that he

should be induced to remain in Europe. In referring to this movement I wrote in the London "Nation":

"The events of the past nine years have played havoe with the reputations of our public men. It is not an exaggeration to say that of all those who were prominent in the public life of the nation ten years ago not one has survived scatheless the tremendous ordeal of those years. . . .. Between them and the past in which they served their country with apparent success and with public approval, a great gulf is fixed, and for the tasks that lie before us the demand is for men who are free from complicity in the events that led up to the catastrophe, free from responsibility for the conduct of the war, and free from all part and lot in the enormous failure of the peace. It is because of this sense of disillusion and the demand for a new start with the new instruments, that the personality of General Smuts commands so much. attention at this time amongst those who are most sensible of our deficiencies and most concerned to supply them from whatever quarter they may be available. The other day Mr. Garvin nominated General Smuts for the Foreign Secretaryship. Others have spoken of him as a possible British Premier, and everywhere the feeling is expressed or latent that in a time of such emergency as the present so conspicuous

}

1

a potentiality should find his field of service at the centre rather than at the circumference of things."

But his presence is required in South Africa. Since the death of General Botha in August 1919 he has been Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa. The majority in the Legislature was not a large one, and it was feared that, without the presence of Botha, the electors might provide even less support for his successor. But in the election of 1921, the South African Party, which is a coalition of the old Unionist Party and of the following of General Botha, had 76 seats, against 41 for the Nationalists, 9 for Labour and one Independent. Although Labor is not numerically strong in the Union Parliament it is nevertheless powerful, and the working agreement between the Nationalists and the Labour Party, different in their aims as they are, has made constant watchfulness necessary. It is much more difficult for General Smuts to spend long periods in Europe than it was in the lifetime of General Botha.

But he realizes, as he has shown by his whole course of action during and since the War, that the trend of events is governed by the decisions taken in London, and it is certain that his cooperation will be given whenever it is humanly possible. He is still in the prime of life and anything seems within the scope of his possible achievement. In the variety of