A.—6

37

APPENDIX IV. SPEECHES REGARDING THE WORK OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS. 11th October, 1923. STATEMENT BY LORD ROBERT CECIL, X..C, M.P., LORD PRIVY SEAL AND BRITISH REPRESENTATIVE ON THE COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS. Lord Robert Cecil: Prime Minister, i am in a little physical difficulty, anel I hope the Conference will pardon me if my statement appears to bes inadequate to the importance of the; esause'. I propose, with your permission, to eleal a little generally with the; topic erf the League, and not, merely ter confine myself to the particular issue; of the, Italo-Greek crisis, unless the Conference desires me to do so. 1 do not propose to give you, or attempt to give you, a review of the; history erf the League proceedings during (die last few years, because, in I,he first, place, 1 have so recently joined, the; Government that 1 should not be- qualified to elo it, from the inside point of view, and from every other point of view everybody is equally qualified with myself, because the wholes of the proceedings, as you know, are always published either immediately or at a very short interval after they have taken place. Aims and Position of League. What 1 would like ter try to do. if I may, is to make some kind of estimate of the present position of the League, anel what place it ought to occupy, and doe;s occupy, in the foreign policy of the Empire. And it is necessary, though I should have hoped it would not have been, ter begin by one or two elementary observations, owing to certain criticisms from highly-placed quarters, which have been passed on the; recent proceedings of the; League. It seems necessary ter emphasize ernese; again that, the, League is not a super-State, and it is not there ter give laws to the world ; it is not an Organization which oil her legislates for or administers other countries; nor is it a mere debating society, a collection of more or less eminent, persons who go there ter indulge in futile oratory. I think it may be defined as an international organization to consider and eliscuss and agree upon international action and the settlement e>f international difficulties and disputes. Its method is not, therefore, the method erf coercive government; it is a method erf consent, and its executive instrument is not force, but public opinion. Now, lam sorry to insist, upon what to many of my hearers must be very elementary observations, and 1 only do so because, in connection with this crisis, there was published a very strong criticism of the' League; and the; aestiern of the British representatives, on the, authe.rity of an e.\-Prime Minister, which seemed ter me to show thai there was a considerable misapprehension, even in tire highest quarters, erf what the; League really strives ter do. Object of League is to promerte Agreement among Nations. The' League's business is not to impose; a settlement, even when a controversy is brought before, it: it is to promote agreement. The recent controversy was brought before- the league under Article lb, as I shall show in a minute;, and its business was to get a settlement of the controversy and an agreement, of the parties, anel, if they did not agree, there; was no power under the; Covenant, nor would it have been at all in accordance' with the general principles erf the League, tor the League ter attempt to esnfeireses what the Council of the League; might think was the proper settlement. As everybody, I imagine, in this room knows quite; well, there is only erne occasion in which, under the Covenant, force is to be ii.sed — i.e., under Article lb and the' object erf that is not to enforce any particular settlement or a particular action, but, to prevent, nations from fighting, especially until an erpperrtunity has been given for discussion, anil consideration, and agreement. It is rather important, I think, that that should be realized in. considering the actions erf the League, and not lesast its action in connection with this Italian-Greek crisis. Then; ought to be no doubt about it, because the very weirds of the preamble; describe its objects "To promote international co-operation ami ter achieve international peace; and security." Those are the two objects of the. League, and they are to be accomplished, as I say, by inducing the nations to agree and act together, anel not by any attempt by a group of nations, or by the, majority of the League', ter enforce on any particular nation any particular line erf conduct which is approved. Results already achieved. Now, I would like—l will be as brief as 1 can— just to ask whether this conception —because it is necessary to ask it in view of what has recently been said in some quarters —whether this conception has, in fact, worked out successfully. Lot me just take the first object of the preamble—international co-operation. 1 do not think the severest criticism of the League will deny.it has achioveei an immense amount of co-operation of the most valuable kind and of the most multifarious description. I. only propose to mention —1 eler not propose to discuss or describe; —what it has done, but, when we come to consider the enormous number erf different ways in which it has acted in oreler to promote international co-operation, I think there will be no doubt in the minds of anybody in this room that it has carried out this part erf its duty with very remarkable success*. Takes its humanitarian exertions : the repatriation of hundreds of thousanels erf prisoners of war, the relief erf hundreds of thousands of