Contents xxxv 



PAGE 



were declined. Therefore, the message of the letter may be 

 taken literally as the echo of a voice from the wilderness. 

 How different would our position be to-day (1916) if heed 

 had been given to the warning then. 



The date of the letter was not much later than that of the 

 famous telegram from the Emperor of Germany to Mr Kruger, 

 the President of the Transvaal, after the Jameson raid ; and 

 this, of itself, was sufficient warning of the hostile sentiments 

 held by Germany towards Great Britain, but the warning was 

 unheeded. 



An example is given of the extensive and precise informa- 

 tion which Germany possessed with regard to our supplies of 

 men and material for the Navy and the Army, and the con- 

 clusion is drawn by the German paper that England, without 

 conscription or compulsory service, could not hope to with- 

 stand attack from any first class European power . . . 431 



Exception is taken to the statement of the Hamburg paper 

 that it is now too late for England to adopt the method of 

 universal service, and it is pointed out that this is inexact, for 

 a great deal can be done even in one year. 



The experience of the present war shows what a formidable 

 army can be furnished by the voluntary devotion of a large 

 section of the young men of Great Britain. Had the British 

 Government been equally loyal and insisted on the laggards 

 supporting the volunteers, we should now (1916) be very little 

 worse off than if we had had universal service for the last 

 twenty years. Perhaps the British people will ask itself if a 

 form of government under which such injustice, or rather 

 iniquity, is possible shall be permitted to persist. 



The civil advantages of universal military service to the 

 people are shown to be at least as great as the military 

 advantages to the nation. Moreover, the stronger the defensive 

 force of a nation, the less likely is the country to be attacked 433 



The recommendation on p. 433 to read the experience of 

 the French in 1870-71, in order to learn what actual invasion 

 of one's country and home means, sounds grotesque. 



It is a remarkable fact that at the present day no German 

 writer or speaker ever refers to the behaviour of the German 

 troops under Wilhelm I during the invasion and occupation 

 of France. We have it from Bismarck himself that he tried 

 to persuade that grand old King and soldier to treat the civil 

 population by what is now known as the methods of frightful- 

 ness and under the same specious plea of shortening the war, 

 but he tried in vain. The King accepted his advice in political 



