Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
6 articles on this Page
Socialists, Pacifism and theI…
Socialists, Pacifism and the I Class War. I By D, J. WILLIAMS, Pontardulais, I The arrangement of the words in the above heading is symbolic of a difficulty which many earnest Socialists and Pacifists feel to-day. The worn" Pacifism stands between "Socialists" and the "class war. and that which the word represents in human feeling and attitude pre- sents a problem which must give us pause." Very many Socialists feel that participation in the present war is, for them, wrong; can it then be right to take part in the class war? Perhaps this dilemma is brought more clearly into relief for those who assume the attitude of non-resistance to war. This doctrine implies that you may not meet physical force with a like force it means that it is wrong to resort to force in defence of your person. This can be easily understood in the case of individuals, but nor, so in the case of nations and social organi- sations. for reasons that should be obvious. Let us examine non-resistance a little further. It seems apparent that the spirit which prompts the non-resisting attitude is not only and really a sort of negative passivity, which allows evil to exhaust itself rather than it should be increased by opposition, but that it is such which LOVES all men with a love which is as intense as it is unfailing. Surely, this is the real basis of non-resistance. It is perhaps necessary to add that this does not de- it-act anything from the value and import ance of the passive attitude to evil as far as it concerns individuals themselves: it does, how- ever. seem to place, the principle in a true per spective and atmosphere. Now if we say that non-resistance means the passive attitude to evil in so far as nations and societies (within nations) are concerned, we are immediately met with serious dififculties. We have to contend not only with the initial and apparently unsur mount able difficulty of un- animity in adopting such a policy, but also the .ontradiojon which faces many Socialists to- day in the circumstances created by the war. This means that. while a. policy of non-resist ance is advocated in some quarters in regard to the war. an unequivocal resistance is insisted upon in relation to the class struggle. di f ferences It is useless to 'enlarge upon the differences in the incidence of the two wars, for though they differ perhaps immeasurably in the degree of horror and suffering, the nature and kind of the one is not so far removed from that of the oilier. Many Racialists would unhesi- tatingly say that if Socialism cannot be achieved without bloodshed, they would rather be without it: would they go further and say, if non-resisters, that if Socialism will not be brought about except by resorting to physical force (e.g. the national strike or a strong po- litical pai'if). they will repudiate it ? This dilemma it .appears to the writer, may be rebutted in either of the two following ways: (1) The ignoring of the doctrine of non- resistance or (2) by accepting the interpreta- tion of its basis and meaning as given in our third paragraph. «' The first point of Is admirably put by Lady Margaret Sackville in a thought-provok- ing article in the May issue of the" U,D.C." She says: "It is commonly believed that a Pacifist is one who disapproves of fighting, but this is rarely the case. He disapproves of the wTong people fighting each otrier that is all t-h.it is to say. he does not protest against people who have a quarrel fighting, but veiv emphatically when they have none. If two isival newspaper editors, for instance, decide to settle their differences with thier fists, far be it from him to interfere. That is a matter of their own concern-a matter purely of individ uai choice. But when these same editors stir up hatred between nations and persuade their fellow-countrymen that national honour dem- ands the killing of great numbers of innocent people on either side in order that the mist- akes, blunders, dishonesties and stupidities of the editors and the politicians may be justified —THEN does he make his protest, THEN does it seem to him unfitting that the man sho,ul pay so lamentable a price for the blunders of the few." Lady Saokville, however, believes that the "term innocent' as applied to the mass of every nation can be used in fe, negative sense merely. For the people are only so far innocent that thev have no national desire for mutual slaughter, and will not fight until their ideal- ism has been exploited. But in a positive sense thev are guilty, since stupidity and in- difference are not innocence. The utter indiiier ence of the peoples of all countries as to where and how they are being led makes it impossi- ble to absolve them of anything save a positive will towards evil. The people stdl be- lieve in wars, although their masters make them, or wars would stop. Let them climb above the point where certain abuses are pos- sible. the abuses will fall away from the life of e communitv like dead leaves. The Utopian philosophy of the Pacifist consists very largely in extending the principle of minding one's own business to national as well as private life. 'Let those who make the wars fight them.' is his homely but golden TuId" Before proceeding to consider the second al- ni,a,N- we -iot as k w h e- ternative to our dilemma, may we not ask whe- ther Lady Sackville's view of Democracy is not rather rigid and exacting, even if it may be orthodox, tending to be ungenerous without the slightest intention of being so. Students of Graham Wallas' "Human Nature in Politics" will readily see what this means, and so will those perhaps who accept the doctrine of Rein- carnation. But even if we qualify this im- peachment of Democracy by pointing to the squalid and sordid conditions of national life, the indifferent education and general Jack of facilities, we must admit its truth in the main however reluctantly we may do so Says Lady Sackville: To demand anything but folly from a democratic Government where the De- mocracy itself is foolish is to demand impossi- bilities. Perhaps so. according to the ortho- dox concepticHI of Democracy. The "stupid and indifferent" democratic cart-horse has more! often than not been considered as a means and an opportunity: a convenience for those who duped it and an opportunity of climbing into power. If we had an intelligent and it per- feet Democracy, there would be no problem of government, but sisce we haven't, the prob- lem of representative government lies (1) in the securing of men who are whole-heartedly with and desire the good and the uplifting of the people as a whole, and are willing, wise, and unselfish in their service and (2) the find- ing of ways and means of electing such men to governing bodies. Democracy is a spirit, and not a logical, cast-iron method. We have said that underlying non-resist- anoe is the spirit which, wHile indifferent to personal regards, is full] of sympathy and love for all men, especially the victims of oppression and wrong. But sympathy and love are use- less unless there is also some active and pow- erful opposition to wrong. Non-resistance, if it means anything, should mean unselfish fight- ing for tke weak against the strong; it means the absence of hatred and vindictiveness aa well. There are those who believe that we are as a nation doing so in the present war, and Pacifists can only pay the homage of res- pect which such a sincere conviction deserves. To say that non-resistanvee means the absence of the use of force when organised movements are considered is absurd The SPIRIT of non- resistance inevitably prompts action which is at once noble, purposive and unselfish, and not inai tion, which may be more or less selfish. Substitute "Fellowship" or "Brotherhood" for Pacifism," and we find the same spirit which conveys the need for action. It is far better that organised force be used altruistic- ally than piously to refuse to use it because it is "foroe," and allow an opportunity for good to pass by. That would be a "Asin of omis- sion a negative "virtue" Which would have been better, for instance, in the case of the South Wales Miners at the time of their last strike: to remain passive and silent in face of the large war-profits of the coal owners, or oe active and demand that the Government take over all such profits for the good-not of the miners themselves—but of the nation as a whole P
To Whom It May Concern
To Whom It May Concern By JOHN HAWKINS. "I When the Editor appealed for someone to write in opposition to the views expressed in my articles. I fully expected that in the event of an opponent coming into the field, that he would attempt to taolde the light employment men's- case. The person who says he is—which I don't dispute—the Treasurer of a certain Lodge, has roamed about anywhere and every, where but the right place. In case of a diffe-I rent opinion being held by another. I expected that he would meet our case with sincerity and a certain amount of logic.. Friend Walters wanted people to believe that I was wrong, but instead of showing it, he has shown the re- verse. He has even admitted that the light employment men have got, a case. and their complaint should be recognised and put right. While having no wish to be personal, still I must say, that when a person writes for the purpose of opposing and admits his opponent's case, he has tied himself in a knot. He writes: Now, personally, I am one who believes that the first charge upon industry should be the full protection of all injured whilst following their employment, and it is up to the miners to back up the above resolution by fcij cIng the Government to include it within the Act. through the means, if need be, of a national strike." That is an admission of our case. It would be wise on the part of my friend if he would read my fast article re the Nottingham resolution. Also he should under- stand that having an Act, and getting it ad- ministered, are two different things. Why is money spent after Acts have been made? Be- cause of judges coming in the main from an- other class, as I have already explained. When they are brought up under an environment that looks down upon the worker, it is almost impos- sible to get justice for the injured. Hence the reason why there should be no difference between the wages of the injured and uninjured as far as fehe grade of work formally done is concerned. The opposition that has come has been more personal than any- thing else. When you are dealing with the light employment men's case, you are not dealing wholly with Hawkins. Hawkins is only one of many injured workmen, and it does J not help you to try and deal with what you fancy was the conduct of that person prior to him writing his articles. Deal with what the articles contain, and argue therefrom. I stated mv case in order to make the case of those who are like me more clearlyl. If one is ag- ainst the injured workmen, he is not wise in admitting that they have a case; but he should try and prove that they should pay the same contributions without receiving the same benefits, and bring truth, justice and fairplay to back him up in his arguments. That is the only logical way to take up the opposition. This has not been done, and therefore, I take it that the case is too strong for the Treas- urer. In no part of any article that I have written is there a statement to the effect "that I desired to smash up the Federation." What has been made very clear is that I believed in unity, and if any man or class of men had a grievance, he or" they should be allowed the liberty of giving utteranoe to it. My com- plaint has been that the leading lights of the organisation have not fought for our rights to be embodied in the Coal Wage Agreement. Reg- arding working constitutionally here again our friend is erroneous, unfair and misleading. If he will see the minute book possessed by the General Secretary, he wil find resolutions sent on to the district, and also deputations sent down to the Executive Council dealing with the light employment men's ease. In the long run there isn't anything gained by evading the truth. The Gilfach boy should be aware of these resolutions and deputations, because he was in the general meetings when they were passed, and when the members of the deputations were selected. Why waste time in writing about some light employment men hemg partially exempted, when I stated it mv- self. the very fact of admitting that they were pa,1 tially exempted proves that in the op- írJÍon of the committee some of them—because of having no -increase in wages—ought not to pay the full amount. Why have the members of the lodge acted in this way? Because they knew as a lodge they had worked in a consti- tutional way, and nothing had been done to- wards relieving the injured workmen. No man can be a Non-Unionist in any district when he is a member of a lodge that pays its fair share towards the upkeep of that district. When it comes to moving an amendment asking the whole of the men of a colliery, whether they are in favour of paying 2/- or 1/- per month, I am within my rights. Being a believer in the men who pay the piper calling the tune/' I must say that they ought by ^ballot give their sanction or otherwise to any increase in con- tributions. I belie've in the workers ruling the organisation of which they are members, not being ruled by men who should be their servants. The individual who opposed that amendment must of necessity be opposed to the workers deciding any monetary matter. Being of this opinion, he must think that the major- ity of the men are only fit to pay contribu- tions. Holding those views he must'think that the toilers ought to be squeezed. Believ- ing that they should be squeezed, he agrees with what the capitalists are doing, and there- fore endorses any reactionary movement. What has sectional strikes got to do with the case for the injured workmen? Has there been anv sectional strike for improving their lot? If there has not, I contend the case is out of court. I am told. "It was in the interest of capitalism that I get maimed." Whoever said that it was not? One would think the writer of the above was out-side capitalist exploitation. But tke fact of his being a treasurer of a lodge proves that he is being used by capitalists for the purpose of making profits. Anyone who has read what I have written wiH know that I have explained that I. and the likes of me, are being bled by the exploiters. Also it has Wen made clear that I objected to being bled by men who claim to work in the direction of up- lifting their class. In feet, what difference is between the members of an organisation and captains of industry, when both are out to pinch me? If that's the game of both, they are much about the sanw to me. I am told "it is against the citadel of capitalism that you must fight to gain a better reward for your- selves and dependents." Agreed. I and those with like ideas will have to fight against the "oitadel of capÜahsm," because it seems that the large percentage of the official element will not fight against it. If they desired to oppose strenuously the capitalist coalowners, tta.e' v would have seen to it that the motions moved by tthe lodge was given a place in the 1915 Coal Wage Agreement. At that time I argued that the proposals should be an axiom of settlement. If these motions had been accepted and embodied in that agreement, it would have brought about that unity that in- dividuals prate so much about. Wluyi our friend shows anxiety about the guns of the proletar- iat being directed against- the "citadel," it appears mere sham, when he accepted that ag- reement wtthout the injured workmen's case be- ing part of the compact. I have never heard him protest against that agreement, even though such as I was not re- cognised in it. It was praise that came from you, and you seemed contented with it, al- though! the most unfortunate were left in the cold. There has been advocation on your part for any improvement for these men. The only time you have been interested is when there is an attempt made to squeeze something extra from their pittance. I venture to say on behalf of those who are injured that they will be satisfied if they get the proper standard plus prevailing percentages. Here is the opportunity of fighting the usurpers of labour, if an oppor- tunity is required. The position taken up by some people is so funny, stating that they are agreeable that justice should be done, and attempting to write against it. simply means that they are neither for or against. The .per- son who is neither for or against is shifted as a rule by any stream that comes his way. Men who believe that the light employment men have got a case ought to be on their side and light the members of theit- own class who are against their cause. Men who do'nt believe they got a case: after fair consideration, ought to go against them every time. But there is no room for the double; you can't please both sides. Words are the order of the day. Now, if active pressure was brought to bear by the workers as a whole, what was accomplished for the able-bodied could be achieved for those who are unable that would be fightirig capitalism, and not an apology. Now, let me put the case for our side as sim- ple and as concise as possible. We think it wrong that we should pay full contributions when we don't receive full benefits. We have no desire to smash up any organisation, but to state o-ur case before the general body, so that the men may give it consideration and act accordingly. Depending on courts for justice, in my op- inion, is a farce, owing o the composition of them. We want it drawn up in a local wage agreement, that the man who is injured shall be paid tlxe full standard and prevailing per- centages vfhen 1;0 returns to light work, for the grade of work he performed formerly. If this were done, no one would object to pay any increased contributions. Try again Georgie!
A Distinguished Protest.
A Distinguished Protest. (To the Editor of the PIONEER.) I Sir --At the very moment that the Gov- ernment. with strong support from puàlic op- inion, is seeking for a solution of the grave problem created by the Conscientious Objector the Authorities have apparently decided to embark upon a campaign of suppression ag- ainst the No-Conscription Fellowship by pro- secuting its National Committee; raiding its head offices; and fining or imprisoning many of its branch officials'. We should, of course, hesitate to counten- ance any propaganda which had for its object the overturning of the law. but we consider it of first importance that there should be a clear recognition of the fact that the resistance of the Conscientious Objector to military law does not result from the inspiration of any organisa- tion, but follows inevitably from the failure of the Tribunals to judge as between conscience and conscience. It is acknowledged, even in times of war, that the Society of Friends is entitled to that respect which must attach to any body which has maintained its opposition to warfare through centuries, and despite much suffering. The No-Conscription Fellowship is aetyig to- day according to the same policy which has established for the Quakers a. secuiyty that would prevent the Government even contempla- ting the suppression of their society. Genuine Conscientious Objectors in these days are drawn from many quarters and are not confined to the Society of Friends. We are personally acquainted with many of the of the No-Conscription Fellowship, and can rouok for their high character. We cannot narmit the Government's new policy of suppres- sion to be initiated without giving^ expression to our confidence in that organisation. We cannot believe it is the intention of the Authorities to add to 1he uneasiness created by the persecution of Conscientious Objectors the further mistake of attempting to suppress an organisation which is oMming for I membe,rs and other genuine Conscientious On\bJ? relief intended by the Military 8emœ Act. Its object should surely oomrnood. the support of all those who desire the retention in our national life of that principle of toleration and that respect for liberty which has been threat- ened by militarism inv other Continental coun- tries.-—Yours, etc., (Signed) PHILIP SNOWDEN. COURTNEY OF PEN WITH. T. EDMUND HARVEY. MARGARET ASHTON. JOHN CLIFFORD. J. A. HOBSON. RIOHARD D. HOLT. Ellb,ei'toii, Golder's Green, N.W., June 21, 1916.
Advertising
TO-MORROW MAY BE TOO LATE. Get a Box TO-DAY! Robert Edes, of Weybridge, writes After I had take the second two I felt better than I had done for over four years. The pain in my back had/ entirely gone." Mrs. King, Runwell Road, Wickford, states: Your pills cured me aftel years of pain." Sufferers from Gravel, Lumbago, Pains in the Back, Dropsy, Bright's Disease of the Kidneys, etc., Sciatica, Rheumatism, and Gout, will find a positive cure in Holdroyd's Gravs:{ P'¡¡,ls. Is. 3d., all chemists; post free Id stamns.- Grav,g4 Pil.1s. Medical Hall, Cleckbeaton Gravel Pills. Medical Hall, Cleckheaton HOLDROYD'S Medical Hall. Cleckheaton
[No title]
Correspondents are requested to condense their letters as much as possible. Letters of a personal character will not be inserted. The Editor wishes it to be distinctly under- stood that he will not hold himself responsible for the opinions or statements of correspond- ents, nor undertake to return rejected manus- cripts. Correspondents MUST write on one side of the paper only.
Re " JONES, SEION."
Re JONES, SEION." (To the Editor of the PIONEER.) I 1)ea.r Sir,—May I venture to ask you to allow me space in your valuable paper that I may further ask Mr Jones of Seion" a few questions P In last week's issue, among many others, he made the following sweeping asser- tion — I also make my declaration, and give him (the Gorseinon Correspondent) my valuation of each Socialist that I have met. They aire unpatriotic, unfair, inconsistent, selfish and cruel. Verily, as Mr Jones claims that hE1 has never used harshness towards the Socialists," "yet," he says, "I have used great boldness in the Spirit." Now, being a Socialist, I have come to the conclusion that I must be included in the each Socialist" referred to above, and as Mr Jones has not exercised his "boldness in the Spirit to my face, may I ask him, Who is made all things to all men that he may by any means SAVE some," to prove one case wherein we are guilty of either being "un- patriotic, unfair, inconsistent, sejlfish or cruel"? Then he goes further and says: "If some of them could succeed, they would have starved me and my wife (who is now in Heaven out of their tyrannous and cruel reach) and my chil- ren." Who are the "some Socialists" you say aire guilty of such an act? How do you reconcile made all things to all men" and then call them names, viz., dross." ? 1 agree God dees commence by new crea- tion," and Christ tells us that By their fruit ye shall know them. "Anxioii.sly waiting a reply. I am. Yours fraternally, WM. EVANS. Llanereh, Gorseinon, June 2(j, 1916. — f Re JONES, SEION." (To the Editor of the PIONEER.) Dear Sir,To trespass on your space at a time like the present is almost criminal. I put in a, plea of extenuating circumstances, i.e., I am a Socialist. I do not think it right to indulge in person- alities so I must treat the matter as apply- ing to a section, and trust Mr Jones will un- derstand. Is Reverend discarded by Mr Jones because it is not Scripture? Why not discard his stipend for the same reason—Chapter 10, verses 9-10 of St. Matthew? I cannot deal with the next portion of the letter. What will become of the millions of Christians that believe in this and other wars"? The explana- tion given by Mr Jones is vague; I think he sees men as trees walking. Socialism is evidently something Mr Jones fails to understand. Socialism has nothing to do with anything spiritually. It is concerning the life here. Mr Jones may preach about the life hereafter, but present day European affairs seem to indicate that we have not learned to live this life. If Socialism is of the Devil," then I am truly damned. The Devil will give M • Jones a testimonial for his indication of the lines of least resistance towards success. If the Socialists had been satisfied to take the lead in social, civil and political matters, etc., etc. would lead one to think Mr Jones was anxious for the enthronement of His Sat- anic Majesty. The grammar used in Mr Jones' letter is confusing at this point. iSiÖ I apologise if I misread him. To individualise is to court failure, so when referring to each Socialist Mr Jones makes a mistake. We Socialists judge a movement on principles, not personalities. At this partition of his letter Mi- Jones stoops to a base innuendo. I do not know what he means, but the few sentences must stink in the nostrils of awlean-mindcd man or woman. Following he gives a valuation of Socialists: I cannot reply. We Socialists would rather think kindly. More dogmatism follows. If prayer is the ,Greatest- power in the world to influence men's m-?nd_why the present state of Europe? If prayer will turn Europe sane, LET us PRAY. Per- sonally I do not pray; I am too busy watching the average Christian who believes in Let us prey." Mr Jones outlines the work of the Holy Ghost as well as the Devil. If Mr Editor you had given more space, I tremble to think of the ultimate "nd of his activities. To judge bv Mr Jones' letter, I think the Devil and the Holy hhost are superfluous. Apparently we have a greater. "We also pray for the starving men, women and children and we feed them. too." Just imagine in'the 20th Century feed them", And we feed them, too"! Mereh- Cenatfutreyr, tl)oiight! What an outrage to common decency! To any thinking person it is absurd to pray to or for starving people. Feed them and proy for the man who caused the starva- tion. that s Socialism. I think we Socialists can safely proceed with our propaganda. Mr Jones1 has awakened a new field for our activi- ties we must, enlist the Devil, and all will be well. Will Mr Jones read "Elegy on the Death of a Mad Don-" (Goldsmith)?— Yours, Death of a iala,d Do' Mr Editor, in the Love of Humanity, Gorseinon. F. EDWARDS. SOCIALISM AT BARGOED. (To the Editor of the PIONEER J Dear Comrade,—Whilst perusing my "Pio- neer." I was simply flabbergasted to observe that in a recent controversy at Bargoed, a Prince Rupert of debate, in the person of Mr J. B. Forbister, of Pengam, simply demolished the pretensions of Socialism in the Rhymnev Valley. After the momentous announcement that Socialism means intellectual stagnation, those of us who have been allured by the So- cialist syren into the belief that Social Democ- racy meant a higher civilisation, must return humble and penitent to the paternal hearth of political and economic orthodoxy. Why intellec- tual giants like John Stuart Mills Alfred Russel Wallace, William Morris, and Bellamy believed that Socialism meant a higher mental pilart0"in the evolution of society is dif- ficult to conceive- A further pronouncement from friend Forbister will be awaited with in- terest. After the stupendous events of the last 22 months it can be imagined that the lu- cubrations against Socialism were received by the Bargoed comrades with the hilarity which the London music hall "gods hail the advent of a new stair." That Mr Forbister knows no- thing of Socialism is clear by his statement re Socialists and evolution." Also to gauge the number of intellectuals in a collectivist commu- nity by the percentage of dunderheads in the aristocratic ranks is on a par with the mental gymnastics of the Scholastics who endeav- oured to demonstrate how many angels c dance on the needle point. As a broraier flf tiona,list I am convinced that our fisiend d not go to the orthodox for information | Rationalism, and might he be well advised n to go to the Anti-Socialists for knowledge J Socialism, I was in the same predicament as 1 Forbister at one time. Should he "oelieve he is fortunate enough to know all the pros 4- cons of this subject, he might try his ha-nd h. in the Rhondda Valley—a hotbed of Socialise and I should only be too pleased to break lance with our friend, that is provided tha* am worthy of his steel, on the Common h any Sunday afternoon, or anywhere else sooner the better.— Trusting that this cord invitation will not be shirked, yours fraternal OWEN C. HUGHES 10 Pwllgwaun Road, Pontypridd. j THE EFFORTS OF THE PEACE SOCIEtj (To the Editor of the PIONEER.) Sir.—In reply to your correspondent Lover of Peace (by the way. I aim as true ( he), he undertakes a good deal when he Mr Asquith and Sir Edward Grey" shouldi be taken literally but metaphorically," that the politician is allowed a certain la1 ude of speech." What is his authority that" Unless a speaker or a writer intimate, the context indicate that the language use,? m3taphorieal, it is to be taken literally. term "Asquith and Co.does not strike j being respectful. What is this firm, a c pans of stock-jobbers, or what? Mr Asq himself is an English gentleman, and one our leading statesmen; and, in my opini'l ought to be referred to in a way becoming high character and position. It is well, too, that Mr Asquith holds reins of Government just now, for who co have kept in hand the wayward steeds as s1 cesfully as he? Your correspondent asks what I mean by Germany being overpotf ed ? and goe? on, Docs he mean that 1 military power of Germany must be crUSh:. If so, he has made a terrible mistake' he quotes from a letter of Lord Cromer to P me right. I am acquainted with the let and have it by me, and don't think I h made a mistake. Lord Oromer wrote the 1, ter, apparentiy, to remove a inisappreiheiiS"1 which existed in some minds, and which statement of Mr Asquith's was said to have 01 ated. He was assumed to have said we vv going to crush the military power of Gena8 but he did not. What Mr Asquith said this: "We shall not sheath the word until military DOMINATION of Prussia is wholly I* finally destroyed." Your correspondent, if many others, has left out the word "DOM^ TION." What I mean by "overpowered" tins. When you overpower a burglar—eii& private or national—that does not mean tV yen are going to kill him outright. You al? him to live, and to do many things, but y1 prevent him from displaying his bUrgla, propensities and DOMINATING peaceful or nations m future. Your correspondent quotes the following fr" Sic Walter Scott: "War is the only game which both parties are losers." I admit tb? and it would be a fair question to put to # Why do you then go to wa/r?" My ans? would be, Because we would be much gre? losers if we did not." It does not need m" mental acumen to see that. We would lose 0 country, nationality, our freedom, and be der the heel of Germany. What is the nie? ing of Gott Straffe England ? What th-i meaning of labelling tiroop trains in 0,1 To London" r What is the iyieaini of Germany building a great navy? "What, the meaning of England keeping a. great ilav. you may ask. To protect our island home. c Germany is not an island, and does not.11 a great'navy for self-protection: she built to take the French ports and our island, a to have us under her heel. What does J° „ correspondent think she built it for For" usement? -For those German little chaps f enj oy themselves in sinking the Lusitaniji and other vessels ? To have an innocent li? j; game with our Jellicoe and Beattv in the Not ? Sea as they did off the coast of Jutland & other day? Your correspondent says ?tga0 So here again overpowering Germany econ? ically is not what 'Lover of Peace means | overpowered. If Lord Cromer and Sir Hi^j Bell have gauged the position correctly, G?. many will be a? oefore, and no one expects <? wishes anything else, only th&t Gennany sho' become strong and prosperous, and that 1 quick time." Indeed! Is your correspond? j interested in German trade? Germany will K be as before. "The Times" of June 23 siM this: Unconsciously we had all become trl,jbut.af' in varying degrees to German trade, depended upon Germany for some of our  sential supplies. It is hardly an e.xagg? tion to say with Mr Hughes that Gerni| penetration had brought us within an  of ruin. I Is your correspondent aware, of ilils? There no doubt we have been very much asleep th?s matter and it needed Mr Hughes to co? here from Australia to wake us up. But ye correspondent would now put us to sleep ag? in order that Germany should become st-ro! '?' and prosperous, "and that in quick tim?' N?, Germany will not be allowed to bec j i DOMINANT again in a commercial sense any  than if a military. Her military and co merciaj dommanc0 were elements in one h? plan. See the resolutions of the Paris Ec nomic Conference. What is the use of urg'?/i, us to formulate onr terms of Peace when  have already done iW? (That is not very \<m oa!.) Here 'they are:" We shall never the sword until Belgium has recovered ?' and more than aU, that she has sacrificed 1Jb! t? France is adequately secured against ?t menace of aggression until the rig s of smaller nationalities of Europe are placed uffi an unassailable foundation, and until the m ft/ tary DOMINATION of Prussia is wholly and i? ally destroyed. Be the journey long or short, we shall mJ pa?se until we ha?e secured Cor the small States of Europe their charter of independent and for Europe itself, and for the world jt large, their final emancipation from  reign of force.—Mr Asqmth's speech, N° j ember 9 1$15. I What 'higher ideal (¡an the Peace Party 0 sire than the one embodied in that admiraM declaration? Whatever our faults may v and we admit they are many, still we beli^ l the Word of God where it says, Righteoi^jJ ness exalteth a nation" in conformity t that principle, and w hen righteousness is 1 stake, we have enough faith in God to cha^jj pion not only our cause, and that of our M lies, but also the cause of the whole worlri When Germany accepts these terms, the will come to an end. ,i With regard to the ?side of oonstructioO J which your correspondent is good enough j invite me to take np? may I refer him to J1l letter of the 10th mst., which had not be, ( published when he wrote?—Yours truly, Tune? 25, 1916. A LOVER 07 PEACE /une 25, 1916.