Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19473, 7 May 1925, Page 8

ANGLO-AMERICAN CONCORD. Mb Baldwin’s speech at the Pilgrims Club banquet, at which Mr Houghton, tho recently-appointed American Ambassador to Great Britain, w'as a guest, contained a pointed reference to the desirability of preventing misunderstandings between Great Britain and the United States. The possession of a common language, the Prime Minister pointed out, is conducive to the easy circulation “in their ‘naked crudity’ ” of foolish words used on either side of the Atlantic, with results calculated to cause irritation. Mr Baldwin’s observations recall the fact, to which some prominence was given, that a week or

two ago Sir Esme Howard, British Ambassador to the United States, took the opportunity in a speech at Philadelphia of making a considered reply to criticisms more wrathful than reasonable concerning, • amongst other things, the British attitude towards the liquorrunning and narcotic problems that confront the United States. Certainly it was time for the British Ambassador to speak out when a spiteful endeavour was being made openly to attach to Great Britain the stigma of being animated by “pure greed and selfishness.” There will always be elements in the great and mixed population of the United States which are still disposed to lose no oppoutmnity of casting aspersions on Great Britain. These are precisely the elements that would find delight, in fomenting misunderstanding between the two great Eng-lish-speaking peoples. The influence which they exercise may be inconsiderable, hut it is too insidious to be negligible. Mr Houghton seems to have been sufficiently non-committal in his reply to the Prime Minister at the Pilgrims Club’s banquet. The United States is waiting, it is suggested, for Europe to pronounce the magic word “Peace,” and then she will be ready to do her utmost to show what American helpfulness can achieve. It is to be apprehended, however, that there is no great anxiety at Washington to discover that the time has come for the abandonment of this waiting policy. Tho attitude of Senator Borah, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is more than cautious when there seems to bo a possibility of American entanglement in international, affairs. The President is not so shortsighted as to advocate strict American aloofness from the world’s affairs. “The interdependence of the peoples and nations,” he has said, “becomes more marked every year. None can stand alone. None dares court isolation. Non© may risk the ill-opinion of civilisation.” That is very well, but between Presidential precept and American practice there is liable to be a difference.