Nathan Adler, reporter for the "New Masses," landed in New York yesterday, having been refused permission to land on English soil. This fact is comparatively unimportant in itself. It does illustrate, however, the paradoxical position in which the British government finds itself. Ramsay MacDonald, the prime minister, was the leader of the labor party and a convinced socialist five years ago; five years before that he was known as a dangerous radical. During the War he was cursed by all patriots for his pacifism. Yet today he is the leader of a government that considers such men as Mr. Adler to be undesirable. Some explanation is obviously necessary.

The present British administration is one of the most conservative of recent years. Stanley Baldwin and Noville Chamberlain dominate Parliament, backed by a docile majority. Those men could easily place a member of their own party in the premier's office. Evidently, however, they feel that Mr. MacDonald lends a non-partisan aura to their rule without, interfering in any way with its program. Why he accepts this uninspired position is not so easily arrived at. Probably in 1929 he felt that a national emergency made compromise a patriotic duty. Since then the subtle influences of Mayfair and old age have lulled his fighting Scotch radicalism. The laborite has become respectable.

His conversion is now apparently complete. When a labor member protested, with some scathing remarks about the amount necessary to support an unemployed husband, against the increase of the Duke of Kent's civil list at the time of his recent marriage, he was answered with icy silence from the premier. Perhaps this is another case of the famous, British skill at compromise, which is so useful from a historical viewpoint but so unsatisfying for the spectator.