The Assembly met again at four o'clock, and proceeded under the Deputy President with the order of the day. But it was a half-hearted business. No one was really interested in anything except the fate of Dr. Svensen, who, it had transpired from inquiry among the boat-keepers, had not taken a boat on the lake last night. “Foul play,” said the journalist Grattan, hopefully. “Obviously foul play.” “Ask the Bolshevist refugees,” the Times correspondent said with a shrug. For he had no opinion of these people, and believed The question was, as an intelligent member of the Secretariat pointed out, who stood to benefit by the disappearance of Svensen from the scenes? Find the motive for a deed, and very shortly you will find the doer. Had Svensen a private enemy? No one knew. Many persons disapproved of the line he was apt to take in public affairs: he wanted to waste money on feeding hungry Russians (“No one is sorrier than my tender-hearted nation for starving persons,” the other delegates would say, “but we have no money to send them, and are not Russians always hungry?”) and was in an indecent hurry about disarmament, which should be a slow and patient process. (“No one is more anxious than my humane nation for peace,” said the delegates, “but there is a dignified caution to be observed.”) Yes; many persons disagreed with Svensen as to the management of the affairs of the world; but surely no one would make away |