Norway and Germanism.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15512, 12 February 1916, Page 8

Norway and Germanism.

In view of the singular methods by which Germany makes good her loudlyvoiced claim to be the only geniune champion of the freedom of the seas, it looks almost inevitable that before the war ends, Holland and the three Scandinavian States will be drawn into its vortex. In that ease, if they consult their best interests, a large "if," as the case of Bulgaria makes clear, they will take their stand by the side of England and her Allies. All four countries figure on the fantastic maps of Greater Germany, drawn, and, with characteristic lack of decency and commonsense, circulated broadcast, by the panGfrmans, and Holland's large rotonial ■possessions are on<> of the innumerable Naboth's vineyards long marked down by Germany for her own use. Sweden is the only one of these States which has so far shown any marked leaning towards Germany, and even that leaning has been sectional in character. The bulk of the Swedish people see that their interests are identical with those of England and France. The aristocratic and military caste, inspired partly by memories of the great Gustavus and the Thirty Years' "War, partly by resentment against Russia, are German in sympathy. But, in a timely and very interesting article in a recent "Contemporary," ilr Mjelde, the London editor of the Cbristiania "Verdens Gano" assures us that

they are the only section in the whole of Scandinavia who are not repelled by Germanism. Mr. iljelde has no doubt at all upon that point, and 110 doubt, either, that in the future, as in the past, i>candinavia's

best friends will he England and France. German influence, he believes, has always been selfish in aim and anti-national. As far back as the days of the Hansa League, it was bullying. insolent, and tyrannical. For that great mediaeval commercial trust which stretched its octopus arms from Novgorod to London, crushed out Norse commerce and shipping, plundered the coasts, made war on the towns, reduced both peasant and fisherxxian to economic vassalage, and in the case of Denmark, almost succeeded in supplanting the whole national culture. Freedom for revival of nationalism was due to Western, and more particularly to English influences, and it was from the years that he spent at Oxford that Ludwig liolbero, the father of Nor-wegian-Danish literature, and the man whoso wit laughed German pedantry, German militarism, and German vulgarity, out of Denmark, drew his truest inspiration. But Western influence was by no means solely intellectual. Commerce proved an even closer bond, and Christiauia, Norway's chief commercial centre, was, early in the 19th century, permeated with English thought and English taste. To France was due the free Norwegian Constitution, modelled on revolution patterns, and introduced in 1814 ; to England, the safeguarding of this bulwark of democracy, when, by the Congress of Vienna, the fortunes of Norway were linked up with those of thu more autocratic Sweden. The immense development of the Norse mercantilo marine, second only to that of Germany among Continental nations, was the outcome of England's freetrade policy, and the flag of the little State on all the seas of the world gives the lie direct to the futile German cry that England is the tyrant of the seas.

All this, and there is much more to the same purpose in Mr Mjelde's short article, is good hearing, for the value of a testimonial is always greater when

■ ifc is given ungrudgingly in circumstances that might suggest the wisdom of withholding it. Tt is good, too, to hear from a Norseman that Anglicism, as he calls it, is never boisterous or intruding, that far from suppressing, it liberates and elevates, while, on the other han4. in "Germanism" there is always something that causes fear, even when it professes to bring gifts. And what have the vaunted gifts of Germany really been? As far as Scandinavia is concerned, Mr Mjelde tells us in the frankest language, they have been "cheap manufactured goods in bad " taste, some learned pedantry, and the "self-importance of .German schoolmas"tcrs." If Mr Mjelde really voices the current Norwegian view, and there seems to be no reason to doubt that he does so, there are good grounds for hi? assertion that littlo Norway, the most contemptible of all the contemptible small nations in Treitschke's opinion, has been the steadying factor that has kept Sweden neutral,' and counteracted hitherto the mischievous activities of the Germanising Sven Hedins.