The Russian Letter.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18217, 30 October 1924, Page 8

The Russian Letter.

Polling day has arrived in Britain without anyone knowing whether the Zinovieff letter is genuine or forged, or having anything like sufficient evidence for an opinion on the conduct of the Prime Minister. On Mr MneI)onald's own showing there has been very grave laxity in the conduct of foreign Oftu-e business, but to allege anything more serious than that seem:, unsafe, on the published facts. The very severe comments of "The Times" must, if they are fair and just, have their excuse in reports that have not reached New Zealand. Mr Mac Donald does claim that the despatch was sent to Russia and published without his full knowledge and approval at the moment of the final decision. He gives a carefully dated account of each step from October 10th, when the Russian i letter reached the foreign Office, to October 24th, when he altered the trial I draft at Aberavon, and sent it back to the Foreign Office "expecting it to | "be returned with the proof of "authenticity." Then he jumps suddenly to "But it was published that and this can help him only if he means, and if it is the fact, that he neither" released the document ItimBelf nor would have released it if bis authority had been sought. And of course if he helps himself in that way he attacks the permanent officials, but hardly in such a way as to entitle "The Times" to say that "never in "modern times has a Minister of the "Crown sunk so Ion." Such a comment can be justified only if "The "Times" believes, and has good and producible reasons for believing, that

what the officials did is what Mr MacDonald wanted them to do at the time, though he may not formally hare instructed them to do it. It would certainly be the case then that his Cardiff speech fell below "accepted standards "of British public life." but no proof that this was his position has so far reached the Dominion. On the cable messages so far to hand we may conclude, at the best that he is a "simple, "honest-minded person" trapped by wily foes, at the worst that he is a careless blunderer, but hardly that, he is a cunning enough sophist and a plausible enough liar to have delivered the Cardiff speech with a clear consciousness of sin. The incident illustrates in the most striking fashion how difficult it is to get the simplest piece of contemporary history accurately. If Zinovieff, or any agent of the Soviet Government, wrote the original letter, the whole world has proof that the Bolsheviks remain international scoundrels. But in the flurry and excitement of the election the public have forgotten the original letter. They do not even remember that it wa s a proposed Treaty with Eussia, and an alleged criminal circulation of Russian doctrine, which brought the election on. Their concern now is whether Mr Mac Donald is straight or crooked, wise or stupid, possessed of a sense of responsibility or unable to appreciate the tremendous risks of running the Foreign Office like a grocer's shop.