i 5 2 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



in a position to make a statement with regard to it." Thereupon 

 Mr. Snowden, the Labour Member for Blackburn, asked, " Does 

 the right honourable gentleman accept the implication in the 

 second question that only those persons recognise their duty 

 to their country who are engaged in naval or military work ? " 

 To this Mr. Asquith replied, " No, sir ; if there were any such 

 implication I should repudiate it." Mr. Snowden's question is 

 an example of our false ideals. Undoubtedly all those who are 

 working for their country during the war, or are even working 

 honestly for themselves and their families, do in a sense 

 recognise their duty; but there is a quantitative difference 

 between their recognition of duty and that of the men who are 

 suffering so enormously and dying so frequently in the trenches. 

 Does Mr. Snowden mean to imply that every person who does 

 anything serves his country as much as the man who gives his 

 country everything, including his life ? According to him, there 

 is no difference between an ounce of duty and a ton of duty, 

 because both are duty in some quantity ! His hypothesis is of 

 course pleasing to those who remain at home; and Mr. Asquith's 

 reply is typical of the politician. Neither of them seems to 

 understand that the time for such sophistries has gone by. 

 When our brave soldiers return from the war (if any of them do 

 return) other questions will be raised — whether, for example, 

 those who should have gone to the front but have not done 

 so are deserving of retaining any vote at all. In the opinion 

 of many they are not entitled to one unless they can show good 

 reason for their want of action, and there are many who would 

 gladly see the Houses of Parliament themselves rid of members 

 who in this crisis of their country have done little to help it. We 

 suspect that the war will be followed by a revolution in England, 

 and one which will be directed principally against the sort of 

 people who now rule us and whose frequent neglect of the 

 advice of experts and of the evident facts of the case has been 

 largely responsible for the war. In a letter to the Times of 

 May 18, Mr. Robert Yerburgh, M.P., writes: "When detained at 

 Nauheim I asked, shortly after the breaking out of the war, 

 a German whom I knew well, what would have been the 

 position if we had had national service. ' There would have 

 been no war,' was his reply." But our politicians and their 

 subservient press ignore this point altogether ; nor have we 

 heard a single apology from the men whose obstinate preference 



