Newspaper Page Text
~ Chesterton
on the Dangers
of the Wrong
Kind of Peace
“Before a Truce Is Declared
It Is Essential to Remember
How the War Was Begun and
What Must Be Done to End
the Menace of Another War."
By G. K. Chesterton
The Noted English Publicint
T"E ehie? danger of the world today
that Germany, ! h cannolt now have
A BWiary clory houia '™ WMmYe A
dipiomatic succos The great physical assault
bas falled. Europe has not een conquered
by Germany and Austria: and is certainly not
golng to be conquered by Hulgaria and Turkey
But these later complications do tend to make
possible something else, which is not & peril of
war. but a peril of peace; and it is just pow
sible that such & calamity may still come aboul
by the combined pressure of the three forces
which., whether or not they work from the
same motive, certainly produce the same re
sult —-the Pacifists, the Pesslmists and the
Prussians
It is & good rule of philosophy when regard
fug an end to reter to the beginning That
dangerous irrelevance in the mind whereb)
things seem more real which are only ore
recent may today make men more hitter
against Bulgaria than against Prussia, and to
porrow motre bitter against Greece than azainst
either. But the perspective of time is no more
actual than that of space. And this attitude
{4 every atom as unpractical as it would be for
a soldier sighting his rifle over a molehill to
think it was larger than the mountain dotted
with the forts of his foes,
What we have to treat with at the end of
the war is what we had to fight with at the
beginning of the war. And the very first thing
to do s to be quite certaln that we realize
what the war i= about. It is & question that
can very easily be answered wrongly, or even
‘stated wrongly
The GCermans, for Instance, are now hard- at
work manufacturing a legend that Germany
fought with her back to the wall against the
whole world, and that therefore even her ;fi
tially successful resistance must be reeard
as & moral victory. In mere history this, of
sourse, 18 quite farcically false. The tdho
gigantic Central Empires took the field when
they had, and because they had, an enormous
superiority not only In munitions, but in mes,
over any forces that could be brought againet
them from anywhere during the most probable
period of the campaign. \
Upon the Meuse, upon the Marne, and Th
gpon the Alsne, they were quite double t els
enemy. So far from it being the fact that a
Frenchman and an Baelishman combined to
attack a German, it was in cold arithmetic the
faet that two Germans attacked one English
man, and four Germans attacked two I'rench
men. Any one maintaining that Germany fought
the world is committed to the remarkable
theory that in the late Summer of 1914 Ger
many was twice as big as the world. This,
however, was not the case,
What went to war with France and Russia
was a sufficlenily large part of Europe to be
for the greater part of the war the larger and
stronger Power of the two. But what was this
section of Europe?! How shall we define It,
and how explain Yts unity of action? . This
18 a really interesting question. In answering
it we must also dismiss those priggish gener
alizations about race which are themselves
the dregs of the dingy Prussian culture. They
were made by professors who lay down the law
about prehistoric man because they know no
history.
This is not a war of Teutonism against the
Slavs, unless the French are Slavs; nor a war
of Teutonism against the Latins, unless the
Russians are French; nor a war of Teutonism
et all, unless the Turks are Teutons. The
Prussians themselves have never taken any
notice of these racial distinctions in practice;
except that they were always ready to grab
one kingdom because it was Teutonic aad
another because it wasn't. The thing we have
to fight is a thing much better known to
history.
Prussian Imperialism
Analyzed ‘and Exposed.
This is a war between those HEuropean
pooglu who are willlng to submit to a sort
of Empire ruled from Berlin instead of Rome,
and those who refuse to submit to it. The
Catholic Bavarians submit; the Catholic Bel
glans refuse to submit. The Protestant Swedes
tend to submission; the Protestant Danes tend
to resistance. The Orthodox Rulgarians sur
render; the Orthodox Serblans resist, The
Mabometans of Constantinople are fighting to
establish this suzerainty; the Mahometans of
India and Algeria are fighting to frustrate it.
The Emperor of Austrla consents to be a
vassal; the Emperor of Russia refuses to be
a vassal.
_* The democracy of France never entered this
_ser) e; the democracy of Italy has broken
~out of it And England, long paralyzed also
~ by Prussian cynicism, has yet somehow stepped
to the right side, so suddenly, but so splendidly,
& an Englishman can only thank God he has
~ lived to see this dreadful day.
b/ A warning being necessary against any weak
in treating with this enormous ambition,
’% suffering from a partial failure, which, it
_ hopes, will be a temporary failure, 1 think our
~ most urgent requirement fs a full realization
-of what Prussia is, and of what, therefore, a
Prussianized world would be. But it is neces
_ sary first to be quite clear about how narrow
?:?;%‘y he rule, however wide may be the realn:
It is not a question of German leadership any
~ more than of Hungarlan leadership. The Ger
_ mans and the Hungarians are not leading, but
Jed. It is a question of the Hohenzollern
_Mahometans of Constantinople are fighting to
: ng and teaching all kinas of vague com
ities, and which" especially bends all its
eipline upon teaching them tha. they are
ing very well taught. That the whole will
and direction comes, and always will come,
‘golely from Prussia (or, rather, xloly from
tsdam) can be proved by any test whatever,
‘Whether theore fcal or practical.
~ The complete theoretic avowal of it can be
~ found in the fact that tbe King of Prussia
- definit dto be Emperor of the Ger
_ mans, exactly as he would have refused to be
- President of the United States; upon the dis.
tinet ground that he must rule them and not
eprese t them. The complete practical proof
"of it can be found in Catholic priests mur-
“Is It Impossible for Us to Imagine
Jesus Bayonetting Anybody?”
Rev Dr. Campbell, the Distinguished English Clergyman, Discusses the
Point of View of the Pacifists and Declares That Christ Never Forbade
War. Nor Should Christians Refuse the Call to Arms of Their Country
By Rev. R. J. Campbell
The Distinguished English Clergyman.
HE time Is drawing rapidly near when It
may be necessary for The Hritvish Prime
Minister to make good his word and ex
ercise compulsion upon those men of military
e, vho have not voluntarily joined the Colors
to defend their country in her hour ‘of need
But i compuision does come, | am lold we
may have difficully with some-—there canndot
surely be very many--who are consclentiously
opposed to the shedding of blood whether In
their country's eause or any other, and whether
that cause 's a so-called righteous one or nol
No cause can be rllhlgous, these persons would
arzue, which involves strife and the exercise
of brute force between one people and another
any more than between one individual and
another
War, they hold, Is a barbarous and wicked
method of setiling intefnational disputes. It
{s a* Mr, Norman Angell would say, irrelevant
to the issue. Even If it were not, even i its
cost to the victors were not out ¢of all pro
portion greater than any materisl gain likely
to be achieved, they hold it is still repre
pensible from every ethical point of view
Better lose all than fight to }np any.
S 0 reasoning, certaln among these good
people are prepared to undergo imprisonmept.
spoliation of thelr goods, and perhaps death
{taelf rather than join the army.
Therfe are other people who are perplexed
in mind about this question from the purely
Christian standpoint, though not a few of them
are already dolng their utmost In the Army
and out of it to help to defeat the Germans and
save Europe.
1 had an Instance of this brought to my
notice some months ago. A fine young fel
sow who had just enlisted sald to me:
/ “1 feel 1 must do my bit for the old country
along with others; we are all up against it
and ! just cannot hang back while other men
are being smashed and killed In a cause that
is as much mine as theirs. But | am quite
well aware that what I am doing s not
Christian, but the very opposite If we are to do
what Jesus Christ told us to do.”
Christians Who Think
They Should Not Use Force.
Now is that really so? This Is a question
that ought to be frankly and honestly faced,
for they are not all cowards who put It
Is it generally known, | wonder, that certain
Quakers whose pacificist principles forbid them
to fight, have, from the beginning of the war,
been engaged in the hazardous service of mine
sweeping in the North Sea and elsewhere?
Persons who aré willing to jeopardize thelr
own lives in such an intrepid fashion as this
are entitled to full respect in differing from
their neighbors on the subject of war in
general, ;
Ought a Christian ever under any eclrcum
stances to fight or approve of fighting? Can
a true follower of the Prince of Peace consent
to or take part In gno shedding of human
bloed on the battlefield or indeed anywhere?
I believe it was Dr. Salter, of Bermondsey,
a man whose selfsacrificing labors among the
poor command universal admiration, who said
somewhere, with reference to the preseny
colossal struggle, that it was impossible to
imagine Jesus bayonetting anybody or tear
ing hyman l&nd bones to pleces with ox
plosives. A many people feel that way.
it would shock them to think of their Lord
under any such aspect,
This troubles them, as well it might, for what
is out of character for Christ, what would be
wrong for Him, ought to be wrong for us—on
this question anyhow. And then there are His
recorded words. Everybody khows them. He
inculeated non-resistance, the turning of the
other cheek to the smiter, and substantiated
the law of love for that of the resentment of
injuries. What are we to say about this?
1 should not ltke to say what some of the
German divines appear to find to say on the
subject. Pastor Lober, of Leipsic, for instance
appears to have been preaching on Christianity
and war, and putting views before his con
gregation that ought to glun the Prussian
and the Turk. Everyvone, he maintains, serves
God who makes the blood of an enemy flow,
and it is because he is thus serving God that
he can reckon on God's blessing. .
The admonition of the New Testament to
return good for evil cannot be applied in war,
he adds. In war evil must be met by evil
and, wherbver possible, by greater and In
sreased evil, War demands Old Testament
severity, not the mlldneel: of the new dispensa
tion. <e is to be praised and envied who sees
nis enemies perish,
This, he concludes, iz only another side of
love for one's country, this desire for thorough
revenge on the malicious enemy:
We beflag our houses, we ring our bells
and sing, “Now thank we all our God"” when
dered by Catholic soldiers to please their
Materialist masters, who were only for a
time Lutherans and are now no longer Christ
jans. If the heir of Frederick the Great wanted
to treat Cologne Cathedral in exactly the same
style as Rheims Cathedral it would certatnly
be done. And that brings me to the first of
the.large facts which I wish to emphasize ahout
Prussia in one or two articles which I shall
write in this place.
When the slaves of the Prussian talk in ugly
undertone about his strength, they mean some
thing. They do not mean anything connected
with the highly belated romanticism with which
he is now posing as the dying hero, as a last
chance of escaping death. Such thin senti
mentalism contradicts, but will scarcely con
T L
o’ » ‘3
3,,.. 3 S ‘ &
5% ’ ! s > A ‘,flg
£~ . | B v -
f‘ 37 : j‘) . g B - Q-.':‘, b
..33”‘8 b - T b »
P - - .! ) -
it 00 DU S
. o o . x 4 . , Y .
"'\ . *-® ‘ - ,h .‘.’ .‘; AR " o :
- ERER " v me b
e e ~ij T N 4 o e o Y >
. N .~ ; # o g ®
- part X ¥ . WS o 4: R . g sV R
Wy 4 » el d 3 )
DT Tt fe b A RO PR
ifi? N . P N se o SRR ‘:‘ AT
T et e R P
LN de R 2E . ‘ ek -
!»% AR -ey !«1 ’ SOPT. . ’ # P 'A"’ “
N ;kx‘v okt }“ WLR R TPA N g
v”\" KO a 1 . &i P .. .fl“ "35 e g
N . MO > L i &7 oo ST ’ — v ¥
¥:s. e d ;
Y .'A L 5 (“ -‘ . € %X3’ ¥“. W
\ Ty B . b g \ shg o™
&‘, " & ol "5 + ot T B b o -
1 % ok W L { >, o m =
. o : # g W R # \’ T e
N 1 M €' . s . N
; .. IRCD AR QVe b
¥.»4P > - . oW
) N N e
. ) , 4 i b . .
’r | > o ol - \; o I#V“. '.. ,}:‘
q o & 4 b -!’ o ¢ -.-'~-J_¢l
£'} ‘LR 5 a ’,’_4‘,..“" o f
; v,lu. 5 & - i ; n’s vl Bs , V,‘;’
Rk 1, A ‘ - ) , s o T ,:,%,'
SIS : gAN iy '}f"xf;';‘
e . R v 53“-1%6 o
s oo PO - % f@»-f«’ e
I A ?ah A ts¥ 3 * "\' "““t - J {'3’ v
; R | R
vy . “o Tl TO B
x PR, PSR
W PR /e e
HUR AL .g : ,”‘ P ¢ A e X, R
. . o P N gl P N : e
~ ‘A -, ™ 4 Ly Tl P e \ ! P oL
' M o 3. & “:‘f“ 'o"“"i}' T;. Lo, o »
e s 0 o AN R £ A ”‘»‘f} o~ -~ 4 Sl
» s WY s P }‘ b i e |
53 s ek e e SN > T A R PRI N S —— s
countiess multitudes of Russians meet a ter
rible deathi in the Masurian swamps, or when
two thousand sesmen are plunged to the bot
tom of the ocean by our submarines. And such
expressions of gratitude and joy are genuinely
German and genuinely Christian.
These are Pastor Lober's words, remember,
not mine, and are indeed the genuine German
blend of vindictive murderousness with abomin
able pietism. They remind one of Punch's sar
castic paraphrase of the first German Emperor's
letters to his wife on the debacle of the French
armies in 1870.71:
1 write to tell you, dear Augusta,
We've had another awful buster;
Ten thousand Frenchmen sent below,
Praise God from whom all biessings flow.
The Right to Use Force
\dmitted by the Church.
But we need not emulate this blasphemous
tosh. The question for us is whether it Is
ever right to meet force with force. We have
to look to something besides the letter of
Scripture here. You can prove almost any
thing from Scripture, and the mere citing of
{solated texts is a profitless proceeding. We
have to look at Seripture as interpreted by the
mind of the Church during nineteen centuries.
From the first the right of the State to
make use of force, even to the taking of human
life, was admitted by the Church, and from
that admission she has never deviated.
This must include the right, even the duty
under certain circumstances, to make war, for
the principle thus set forth extends much
further than the coercion of the subject. It
the State has the right to judge and condemn
a criminal wltpln her own borders—and who
would question’{t?—she has the right to resist
unjust aggression from without, or even to in
terfere on behalf of the oppressed and down
trodden beyond the area of her sovereign juris
diction.
Surely in taking this ground—which she did
even in New Testament times, as we see from
the Pauline epistle—the Church has all aiong
known the mind of her Lord. Is {t so certain
that Jesus would not have sanctioned the tak
fng of human life? What distinction Is there
hetween the taking of life and the emyployment
of any other method than that of moral suasion
in the overthrow of iniquity?
And it is clear as clear can be that our Lord
did contemplate bringing force to bear in the
long run upon human wrong-doing. His teach
ing about the last things leaves no room for
doubt upon this. And the force was to be em
ployed by Himself. People seein to forget this
when talking about the example of Jesus. It
was only up to a point that He meant to
tolerate men's wickedness »r appeal to their
beiter nature. Beyond that pomnt He declared
lle weuld overthrow it with a strong hand.
It makes not the slightest difference to the
question at issue that He expected to be sup
ported by heavenly rather than earthly legions
ceal, the whole of his historical theory and
practice. He has never shown any sympathy
with defeated valor in other people; and he
has not even shown any particular examples
of it in himself. His armies have fought with
the workaday courage of all white men; b‘
his success has always been due much more
to their negative than their positive qualities.
It may even be said, politically, at least, that
the Prussian is supreme not because Germans
fight, but because they don’t fight. Certainly
he has never once in this business shown either
special skill or unexpected daring as apart from
numbers and obedience. 1 know of only two
cases in this war in which manhood and the
handling @f men made a larger force give way
before a smaller one. One was when Joffre
Rev. Reginald J. Campbell.
in so doing. The principle is just the same.
There is to be a consecrated use of t~ree to
counter and overthrow force enlisted on the
side of evil. Nor can we absolutely restrict
the participation in the struggle to angel hosts,
That strange book called Revelation, not one
of the latest in the New Testament, indicates
otherwise In {its mysterious allusions to
Armageddon—a word often on the lips of
journalists and public speakers to describe the
present European conflict—and to a final and
terrific trial of strength between the em
battled forces of evil and those of good on
the stage of human affairs. It is not all ¢lle
gorical. It is a real world war that is gpoken
of.
Moreover, our Lord's own very emphatic
words about non-resistance are plainly ad
dressed to the individual and are concerned
with the avenging of personal affronts. He
never told ‘us to turn anyone elge’s cheek to
the smiter, which is just the point. And He
never said a single word about refusing to
obey th 2 call of the State to defend one’s home
and kindred by force of arms.
Tnat the Church never understood Him to
mean that is plain from her practise in the
early centuries. There were plenty of Christian
soldiers in the imperial armies. Being a
Christian did not disquality a man for under
taking such a service. On the abstract prin
ciple, there is no room for doubt. Christianity
has always recognized that the executive of the
State “beareth not the sword in vain.”
Christians Were
Soldiers in Early Times.
It is not so easy to say where the limitations
of that authority come in. In the last resort
that is a matter for the individual conscience
to settle. It might be a Christian duty to re
use to shed one’s blood in & bad cause at the
bidding of the State or any other authority.
In the early days to which .I have already
alluded, there were martyrs who died rather
than fight just as there were martyrs who dled
rather than render divine honors to Ceasar.
I am only pointing out, and it is well worth
emphasizing, that from the very first the
Chrigtian Church, as a whole, did admit that,
under certain eventualities undefined, the State
had the right tc make war and therefore the
right to require its subjects to serve in its
armies.
The Christian ideal was universal peace; but
in such a very unideal world as ours it had to
be acknowledged that on the wai to universal
peace it might sometimes be the duty of a
Christian to draw the sword.
[ am not insisting that war itself is a good.
It is not a good. Pain in itself never is. War
may be a merciless purgation of the body
politic, & bracing up of the energies of the
goul; but It is a grim remedy even at the best.
1t is no more a good than a surgical operation
s a good. It may be necessary to get rid of
a disease, but it would be better not to have the
trapped and turned the whole huge onset just
before it could touch Paris; the other was
‘when the Serbians rolled the second Austrian
invasion down their mountains to the Danube.
The courage of the forlorn hope is & kind
which Prussia has not only never had, but has
never admired.
Nevertheless, as I say, the sycophants of the
Prussia® Imperialism have something in their
minds when they talk of the strength of
Prussia. And what they mean is this: That
Prussia has a certain directness of action as of
a giant who is deaf or blind. She does not
tee]l atmospheres. In the sunlight and the
silence of staring multitudes, she will act as a
wicked man will act when he is alone. Some
of her international acts were even more in-
disease t 0 Degin with. We have 10 distinguish
between what is ideally and what ls practically
right
The Christian ideal of marriages, for ex
ample, is the union of one man and one wWoman
for life on the basis of pure mutual affection
and loyalty. But in practise we have to recog
nise that it is not always attainable with
human nature as it is, and we leglslate ac
sordingly.
The Christian ideal, again, Is that of the
ange! song at the birth of the world's Re
doemer, “Glory to God In the highest, and on
earth peace, good will amongst men” Bat
while tyranny, oppression aad crueity remalin
there must be war.
Put, further, 1 utterly and entirely dissent
from the view that there {s something essen
tially uplifting in War as war. The late Mr,
Lecky, in his History of European Morals,
says: “That which invests war, in spite of
all the evils that attend it, with a certaln moral
grandeur, is the herolc self-sacrifice it elicita
With perhaps the single exception of the
church, it is the sphere in which mercenary
motives have least sway, in which performance
{s least weighed and measured by striet oblk
gation, in which a disinterested enthusiasm
has most scope. A battlefield is the scene of
deeps of self-sacrifice so transcendent, and al
the same time so dramatic, that in spite of
all Its horrors and crimes, it awakens the most
passionate morsl enthusiasm.”
Is there no other way of arousing this moral
enthusiasm, no other way of evoking to the
same degree the spirit of self-sacrifice? Yes,
if civilization as a whole could rise to the
moral level requisite for it. The late Professor
William James, of Harvard, used to maintain
that one great thing which modern civilization
had yet to do was to find a moral substitute
for war, an incentive to action that would bring
out the grandest qualities of human nature
without the accompaniment of slaughter and
the suffering and anguish that follow in its
train. On that we were sufficlently great of
soul to do it, and to do it as one man!
Every normal human being must dread,
loathe and detest war, for {f it reveals some
things that savour of heaven, it reveals more
than that reek of hell. See what the glorifl
cation of war has done for Germany.
I have not the slightest hesitation in admit
ting that as a people the German are intel
lectually better trained and more efficient than
we, their resources better organized and de
veloped, their manhood better disciplined and
equipped for the business of life in its material
aspects. But look at the temper of mind that
goes with it-——hard, arrogant, domineering, un
able to appreciate the rights of others or even
to understand others point of view.
The Evils of
Militarism Shown by Germany.
It has given Germany the most unscrupulous
government of modern times; for as sure as
you get a nation mastered by the monster of
militarism, a nation in which everything else
in administration {8 subordinated to militaristic
ideals, you get a government without senti
ment, without humanity, without respect for
the ordinary obligations of truth and honor.
Two ideals of the State confront each other
on the battlefield to-day. For the sake of the
future welfare of mankind which were it bet
ter should prevail? I think we could fairly
appeal to civilization on that issue alone with
out fear of the verdict. Is the State a moral
entity or is it not?
Our enemies hold that whatever the State
chooses to do it may do, if it thinks it to be for
its advantage, that considerations of right and
wrong have no meaning as applied to the State.
No question of conscience, they say, must deter
the individual from carrying out its behests. A
more cynical doctrine the world has never
heard. If Germany were to win this war that
doctrine would be triumphant. It is for us to
determine that it shall not be.
We war not for revenge nor for our own
aggrandisement. We war to set mankind free
from a bondage under which it has groaned for
generations, Germany even more than our
selves. We are fighting the battle of the Ger
man people as well as our own, paradoxical
thought it may seem to say so.
We are fighting the battle of A‘}noriou as well
as of Hurope, and America knows it. We are
fighting for democratic institutions, for inter
national justice, for the righf of the weak to
live in safety alongside of the strong.
International law has broken down. We
have got to rebulld it. Political and social
{dealism has been swept under by this flood of
cultured barbarism from Berlin. We have got
to restore it to its proper place. We are war
ring to end war.
The world has an object lesson before it to
day as to what militarism leads to. Heaven
grant that the outcome of the present awful
collision of épiritual and material forces may
be the end of militarism, and, as our Prime
Minister sald a year ago, the creation of a pact
»f the natfons to prevent it from ever lifting
its head agaln, not in Germany only, but any
where else throughout the world.
decent than immoral. This nakedness and
even deadness in her deeds does impress some
weak-minded sophists and willing slaves as a
sort of strength.
And the truth to be emphasized here is that
wherever the Prussian goes, and however he
stands, these deeds he will do. He will do
them when they are quite out of the picture
he is trying to paint; for he is no judge of
gictures. He will do them when they are in
at contradiction of the words he has just
uttered; for he is ignorant of the magic of
words. They break out of him in calm sur
roundings and coeld disquisitions, like screams
out of a man pessessed.
He smilingly assured the Americans that a
mere misunderstanding had obscured his good
The Longer the
War Lasts
the Worse for
Germany
Signs of the Fatal Weakness
Are Already to be Seen Which
Insures Ultimate Victory for
the Allies.
-
By the Editor of the London
-
Nation
E can gain & just insight into the for
‘x; midableness of an enemy by measur
tng his reservolr of tralned or tratn
able men and his munitions In hand and pro
curable. Although we know little of his moral,
we know that It must decrease If 1t ia realized
that the available troops are diminishing and
the store of munitions is becoming low,
Now, If we examine Germany's conditioa
with regard to the first of these factors we
see that attrition has fulfilled its purpose in
striking fashion. We know that she must keep
four milllon men in the fleld, and of these
three must be of first-rate fghting quality.
We further know that at this moment she can
not have lost from the various flelds of cam
paign less than three and a half mililons; and,
finally, we know that eight millions must e
her maximum recruitment. And since the
foundations for these calculations may be
questioned, we have two supporting consider
ations for the conclusion to which they lead.
That Germany's reserve of ablebodied men
must be near the end Is clear from the fact
that to conduct her Balkan adventure she has
sent poor troops, and from the further fact
that she is being graduaily pushed back on
the Russian front, where it is imperative she
should hold her own. Another fact which is
indisputable is that recent regulations fssued
to doctors who examine recruits state that a
man is only to be considered unfit if his dis
uu; make him incapable of his ordinary civil
work.
That is a strikinz fact, and under its ap
plication men are belng recruited who can
never take their place In the firing-line. As
the men on garrison duty and at work on
communications are already the older and less
fit. these new recruits will increase the re
serve by reinforcements superior only to them
selves.
Essential Articles.
Germany Cannot Obtain.
As to the question of munitions, Germany
{s now short of metal, rubber and glycerine.
These are all necessary commodities. She has
not too much cotton, and s beginning to be
anxious about securing more, or some sub
stitute. Cellnlose is an absolute necessity for
the manufacture of munitions, and though cot
ton is not the only source of it, the use of any
other form would require new plant. At this
moment Colonel Gadke admits that the sup
plies of munitions are low.
Germany’'s economic condition is such that
she can continue the war on Its present scale,
8o far as that alone is concerned, for a formid
able period; but she cannot create metal, rub
ber, glycerine or cotton.
When we come to examine her morel, we
are met by an extraordinary array of facts
which all point to the same conclusion. There
{s much real distress among the people owing
to lack of meat, milk and fats, and such a state
must inevitably react upon the soldiers. We
kuow that the Germans hoped to secure a vic
tory in the Summer, and that they hate the
idea of another Winter campaign. There are
outspoken statements in the German papers
which would never have appeared last year.
They admit that they cannot cope with our gub
marines. They praise our solalers. They
praise the Russians and express the fear that
they are recovering too quickly.
Herr Harden boldly warns his countrymen
that Russia and England are only now begin
ning the war. Another writer says that it is
certain that we all desire peace. Yet another,
at the end of a vigorous article, hints that
when we are willing to make peace and be.
triendly with them, they, too, will make their
approach to us. It is sometimes sald that
Germany can refit from the Turkish Empire.
This would probably be true if she had a year
or two in which to organize, though rubber
and cotton cannot be obtained in any quan
titles. She could also obtain reinforcements
if she could have time to train them, and if
the Turks would consent to fight in Russia or
France, a suffgestion which is repudiated by
competent authorities as unworthy of consid
eration.
This, then, seems to be the state of our
chief enemy. He is within sight of his last
reserves, short of munitions and irreparably
deflclent in several necessary constituents for
their manufacture, financially bankrupt, short
of food and with a growing weariness of the
war, which he feels to be beyond his powers.
In other words, he knows—as he ought to
have known from the beginning--that the com
bination of Russia, France and England is too
much for him.
How the end will come, it is almost idle to
speculate; but it is difficult to think it can
be very far off. It is reported that the Kalser
says that he hopes for success from our eco
nomic breakdown. This is a warning, but it
is also a proof that the end may not, Indeed
probably will not, come by a series of dra
matie victories, though there will doubtless
be allied victories before the end. It will
more probably come from a progressive attri
:h:: of the enemy in every element of his
orce.
intentions, which should henceforth be fulfilled
faultlessly; and then screamed and sank the
Arabic. He spread out his arms to the Popa
and the princes of the earth, asking for a halt
and a hearing for his equitable cla‘ms; and
then screamed and shot the nurse wiho tended
his wounded.
And the first moral of the matter as it con
cerns us here is this; that no parade of an
improved tone in his highly disciplined Press,
no elaborate preliminaries of peace planned
out for impartial arbiters, no falling back on
abstract amiabilities will ever cast out this
devil that is in him; but when he mounts his
throne again robed in white and with a dove
for his eagle, he will give his command for
a crime.