2 PARIS, 1937: COLONIAL QUESTIONS AND PEACE 133places, such that the demands of ‘even the most dynamic “duce” could
be treated more truly on their merits.’^166
Toynbee also delivered a lecture in the series, his contribution for the
most part being in the nature of a historical survey. In regard to more
general questions, at the outset of his lecture he stated that it was impor-
tant to distinguish between peaceful change and ‘change that takes place
without war,’ a point that Manning had also raised. Toynbee observed
that when people speak of peaceful change, what they generally have in
mind is change that is ‘peaceful and voluntary,’ adding that there had
recently been many changes that were not of this kind. The first example
he gave of a change that takes place without war as distinct from a peace-
ful change, was Germany’s unilateral decision to reoccupy the Rhineland,
a decision that had presented the other party concerned, namely France,
with a fait accompli.^167 The second example that Toynbee gave con-
cerned the British pronouncement around the turn of the century that
‘all the land in its Kenya Colony [was] to be vested no longer in the for-
mer native occupants but in the British Crown’. Toynbee stated of this
pronouncement that one could scarcely call it peaceful change, ‘for,
while it was done without fighting, it was not done with the consent of
all the parties concerned.’^168
Yet despite having qualified the notion of peaceful change by insist-
ing that change of this nature must be both peaceful and voluntary,
Toynbee concluded his lecture in a way that suggested that he did not,
at least in the midst of the current circumstances, wholly subscribe to
that qualification. Towards the end of his lecture, he observed that
‘[l]ife and law must be kept closely in touch,’ maintaining that to this
end it was necessary to not only create machinery of collective security,
but also to embark on the ‘more difficult’ task of creating international
machinery for the ‘regular method perpetual re-distribution of power,
of wealth, of population, and of the goods of this world’. Taken at face
(^166) Manning, ‘Some Suggested Conclusions,’ in Manning, ed., Peaceful Change, 188. See
also C. A. W. Manning, ‘The “Failure” of the League of Nations,’ in Carol Ann Cosgrove
and Kenneth J. Twitchett, eds., The New International Actors: The United Nations and the
European Economic Community (London: Macmillan, 1970), 121–23. In this article which
was published in 1942, Manning paints the LON’s failure as a failure on the part of gov-
ernments to support its sanctions provisions.
(^167) Arnold J. Toynbee, ‘The Lessons of History,’ in Manning, ed., Peaceful Change, 28.
(^168) Ibid.