The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1917. SWEDEN'S TREACHERY

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3187, 11 September 1917, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1917. SWEDEN'S TREACHERY

Duplicity is much too mild a term to apply to the part that Sweden has played in making her diplomatic organisation available to Germany In furtherance of the latter country's submarine campaign. v 'America and other Allied nations are giving Sweden a chance to explain, if she can, but the facts/published yesterday and to-day admit of no other interpretation than that Sweden, while masquerading as a neutral, has been acting as the particularly unscrupulous ally and agent of Germany. The only reservation called for is that the general population of Sweden may not approve of the criminal violation qf neutrality of which the Swedish Government and its diplomatic representative at Buenos Aires arel clearly shown to 'have been guilty.' Some denials on "behalf of the Swedish Minister to Argentina are transmitted to-day, but they deserve no attention in face of the plain statoment made yesterday in a British official report: "The Swedish Minister in Argentina Has been convicted of duplicity in. sending and receiving German code messages _ relating to submarines." The position of the Swedish Government is made clear by a London message which states that the Foreign Office at Stockholm has been acting as a telegraph office for.the German Government during the last three years, regularly transmitting German cablegrams m cipher as Swedish Government messages. Further details emphasise the guilt and hypocrisy of the Swedish Government, and prove that in its cynical disregard of honesty _ and fair dealing it is an apt pUpil of the military masters of Germany. Sweden was once a great country, but a more ignoble situation than she has been placed, in by the perfidy of her Government it would be impossible to. imagine. It is possible to respect an open enemy, but only contempt can he felt for an enemy who makes smooth professions of • neutrality a cloak for treacherous action. # While it is fair meantime to draw .a distinction between the Swedish Government and the Swedish nation in apportioning responsibility for the crime now exposed, it must 'bo,added that Sweden was already open to the charge of compromising her neutrality by discriminating .most unfairly in favour of Germany. Becent investigations by the American Government showed that Sweden was supplying Germany with vast quantities of food and materials for munitions and, making use of imports from the United States to expand this trade to the utmost. Figures showing the magnitude of the Swedish export to Germany were published in our columns a few days, ago. A Jrenoh publicist who had visited Sweden wrote at the end of last year :— It may almost he said that, after consigning to Germany the accumulated stoves of their shops and warehouses. Hie Swedes have been engaged in supplying tho Germans with commodities necessary for their own i oneumption. The Swedish peasant appears to havo parted.with his last remnining cow as a consequent of the inducement held out by tho high prices the Gei'mana have been filling to give for everything. With regard to tho Swedish industries, they have been deprived in the same way of tho raw materials which are necessary to them.

As American official reports have shown, Sweden contrived to maintain her export trade to Germany at a very high level right up to the time when the American embargo made itself felt. The traffic was one which enriched the individuals engaged in it, but did much harm to Sweden's native industries, and subjected the general body of the population to hardship as a result of tho scarcity of essential commodities. Tho scale on which the traffic was developed afforded clear evidence of the pro-Gorman sentiments of the Swedish Govemmont. In other ways Sweden acted almost openly in the

interests of Germany and against tho interests of tho Allies. ' For instance, in 1916 she mined the northern entrance to tho Baltic, from her own coast to the German mine-field, thus closing tho only zone by which Allied vessels could proceed along tho Baltic. This arrangement *he was ultimately induced by the Entente to modify to somo extent. A remarkable example of the craven subservience, to Germany which has been tho dominating factor in Swedish policy since the war began was afforded' last year. German submarines sank three Swedish ships and captured a fourth. Finding that the latter vessel had no coal in her bunkers, the Germans took her into a Swedish port to obtain the necessary fuel. The revelations now made were hardly needed so far as throwing light on the quality of Swedish neutrality is concerned. Hitherto tho reins of power have been held by a strong and active" pro-German faction. It has been little ohecked by a population which seems to. ho governed largely by greed of gain, and has been greatly assisted by tho persistence.' in Sweden of what is called the German myth—the myth that the German Army is invincible.. It is possible, that the pro-Ger-mans in Sweden, are now at the end of their tether. Some muttcrings of discontent against the fruits of their policy were heard months ago. Shortage of food and a revulsion from the pro-German sympathies of the Court.and aristocracy have %1 to popular discontent, and there-has even' been some talk of revolution. In March last, Knut - Hammakskjoh>, a strong German sympathiser who had i headed the Swedish Government throughout the war period, was compelled to resign and was succeeded by Dn. Schwartz. Wellinformed commentators, however, described the new Premier as merely a pallid echo of his predecessor, and attributed the change in leadership to a desire to delude tho people without making any real concession or change in policy. It is now evident that this opinion was well founded. The state of political parties in Sweden was summed up by an English ■ correspondent a few months ago in the following terms: Branting is Swedon's most : powerful citizen, with, perhaps, one exception, and that is Hanimarskjold. The wrestle betwoon Branting and Hammarskjold is terrifically fierce. . . . The fond is between. pro-German Conservatives, who support Hammarskjold and want a proGerman policy, and pro-Entcnto Socialists (with docilely pro-Entonto Liberals under thoir wing), who want good relations with England. '... . This difference of views has c'omo to a head in an armaments issue not visibly connected with pro- or anti-Germanism; I>ut at hottora all Swedish armamonts issues are between pro-Germanism and anti-Germanism. Tho pro-armaments party is pro-German, Conservative, and Hanimarskjoldian; and the anti-armaments party is pro-Allies, Socialist, Liberal, and Brantingian. Daily the struggle'takes'a'more pro-German versus pro-Entento character. Haminnrskjold's Conservatives swear that tho Opposition's motive is Entente-activism (activism being a desiro for fighting on either side). The Socialist-Liberal Opposition rotorts that tho real activists nre Hammarskjold's Conservatives, who want to foi-eo Sweden to fight for A late message states that Briti'h newspapers, while taking the_ most serious view of tho present disclosures and holding that tho Allies have every right to treat Sweden as an enemy, consider that the best remedy will bo to subject her to the strictest blockade measures. • This no doubt is the right policy. Sweden has shown little capacity to realise the majesty and essential justice of the cause- in which the Allies arc fighting, and evidently has, little gratitude,for their championship of small nations,. but regard for her material interests may bring norto reason. Largely as a result of her •uncontrolled traffic with Germany she is peculiarly susceptible to the operation of a blockade, and this is probably the most effective weapon available to the Allies in compelling the Swedes to discard their pro-Ger-man leaders and adopt an honestjy neutral policy. '