DOMINION TOPICS

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 105, 27 January 1940, Page 15

DOMINION TOPICS

A Question for Neutrals.

“Neutrals must ask themselves what is the alternative to the blockade,” says the London “Daily 'Telegraph.” “It is that Germany should continue her destruction of their seamen and their shipping as long as she has a submarine and a mine to put in the sea. Her declared objective is to ' frighten into uselessness all their ships which she cannot destroy. ‘Routes which touch England lead to death,’ is the brag of Berlin. It is, to be sure, a suicidal policy. Complete blockade of German exports would be no less surely by the paralysis of neutral shipping than by the measures of ithe Allies. But reason long since ceased to reign in Germany. The maritime nations are not thus to be scared. Japan has already given her answer. Erightfulness will not keep her ships out of British waters. Reprisals depriving Germany of her last resources will diminish the losses of neutrals and hasten the day when peaceful shipping has again the freedom of the seas. In retaliation for the mine outrages we are defending the interests of every country with a merchant navy. If a war were won by the murderous piracy to which Germany has resorted there .would be an end of safety for shipping on its lawful occasions.”

Too Many Cooks. “In all parties,” says the “Financial News,” “There is agreement that the situation demands special machinery for co-ordination. The reason for this need is obvious. Modern warfare requires a total economic effort, Which cannot be handled by piece-meal methods. The nation’s production has to be increased to the maximum possible extent, and the nation’s economic activity has to be redirected into new channels. This cannot be achieved by independent Ministries acting on their own. The export trade is the simplest example of this truism: despite the encouraging export advance in November which Mr. Stanley revealed, the need for co-ordination effort remains. It is manifestly impossible to follow an energetic and consistent export policy when six Ministries (and incidentally, the Bank of England as well) have to be consulted, and when each of their grievances has to be smoothed out before anything can be done.” Better Than Party Victories “Parliament,” stresses “The Times,” ‘‘has secured much-needed amendments in the defence regulations, in the Ministry of Information, in the administration of some controls, in the organization of civil defence, and in the scales of certain pensions and allowances; and it has heard with satisfaction of the impending appointment of a Select Committee on Expenditure, which is highly important not merely for the avoidance of waste but also for the maintenance of effective Parliamentary control over expenditure. These achievements have been better than ‘victories’ over the Government. Ministers have often had the sense to give way graciously when a strong case has been made out, though many more achievements of the same kind will be required before all the avoidable faults and inconveniences of an emergency system have been eliminated. Nevertheless it has already been shown that Parliament, so far from degenerating in time of war into a mere instrument for registering the will of the Executive, has shown even more independence and constructive power than in time of peace. The ‘free institutions’ which the King rightly described as our birth-’ right are in no danger of even temporary suppression.” Germany’s Submarine Fleet. “Germany entered the last war with only 28 submarines,” says the “New York Times.” “When the armistice was signed she had 212 on the ways and projected. By November, 1017, a Üboat made an average of only six voyages before meeting her doom. What Germany has to fear is not her ability to make good her losses in ships but her ability to train the highly expert crews needed. The officers who commanded her submarine fleet toward the end were not the equals of Weddingen. Indeed, the British were astonished at the youth and ineptness of the crews who surrendered. Germany began her present attack on enemy and neutral shipping with at least CO submarines. To date (this was written under a month ago) she is supposed to have lost about 18 of these. That she will follow her established practice of building more and more submarines may be taken for granted. They are her chief ' weapons against the blockade. But where are the officers and men to come from? The demands on competent .leadership are more severe than they w ere in 1914-18.” Toward a New World Order. “We entered the war, not with hot passion, but with serious deliberation, accepting it as a necessary sacrifice for a spiritual end. That spiritual end is defence against a deadly attack on fundamental principles of social morality which are recognized throughout the nation, not only as necessary for an ordered. civilized life but as having their origin and sanction in God. Even as we defend them with the only weapon left us, we are acutely aware that war destroys and cannot create, and actually imperils in ourselves the very spiritual end we desire to serve. Our war aim is not to impose our will as •victors on the vanquished, but to unite wth neutral nations, and our present enemies, on the settlement of . peace on •the surest foundations. Christian influence is obviously and directly at work. Thus we are fighting without malice, without selfish aims, without the will to domineer; eager only to shape a world order in which Christian ideals may survive and be strong.” —Dr. Fisher, the new Bishop of London. Gloves Off! . “The neutrals will suffer inconvenience at our hands,” says the “News Chronicle,” “but that is the price they must pay—and should pay gladly—for the removal from the world of the Nazi pestilence. Once again, history is repeating itself—only in this war the full blockade is starting several months earlier than it did last time. In the last war it was not until March, 1915, that German submarine methods called forth the famous Order-in-Council which imposed a complete two-way blockade on Germany. The Nazis notorious] v learn nothing from the mistakes of their predecessors. For the second time in a quarter of a century they have issued a challenge which will result in their undoing. ‘We must, export or die.’ cried Hitler in a speech early this year. Exactly I Britain’s new Order will sever Germany from her overseas customers and deprive her of the foreign exchange which she needs in order to be able to buy from the countries adjoining her. Heavy shipping losses may lie ahead of us in this economic war with the gloves oif. Hitler’s new weapon may continue to take its toll. But in the end it will be countered successfully, • and our blockade will end as it ended last time ■—in the collapse of the German Gov'ernment.” '

Economic Co-ordination. “The right method of placing industry on a war footing is not to draft business men into Government departments, where they find their best ideas subject to an elaborate process of official revision and their desire for swift action strangled in red tape. The right method is for a given industry to be tol'd what it is required to contribute to the nation’s war effort and then left free, as far as possible to deliver the goods. This giving of orders should devolve finally on a single Minister with the vision and the power to weld all our industries together into one great sweep of concentrated and harmonious energy. He must be, in one sense, an economic dictator —but not a dictatorial bureaucrat. He must give clear-cut orders—but they must be orders which industry will gla'dly obey. In war-time industry has to make many sacrifices of its own conveniences and competitive traditions for its country’s good. But British industry must be encouraged also to retain to the full its tradition of independent responsibility, so that it answers to all demands with free initiative and proudly makes the nation’s cause its own.”—The “Yorkshire Post.”

A Truce To Party Strife. “Throughout the atmosphere of Parliament has been kept notably free from party- antagonisms,” points out the “Yorkshire Post”: Conservative and Opposition M.P.’s have often been able to collaborate without loss of their distinctive points of view. On the Government side, a welcome innovation has been the weekly statements through which the Prime Minister has usually kept the House and the country informed on the general progress of the war. The Government, too, have not sought to repress the increased zeal of members at question time, and adequate facilities have been allowed for those debates on the adjournment, when critics of Government methods find their best opportunity. All this makes an encouraging picture of democracy at work, and we must hope that Parliament will continue to add to its reputation during the new session. In Germany, under the Nazi regime, virtually the sole task of the Reichstag is to assemble periodically to hear Hitler speak. The effect must be —in wartime particularly—to foster a mass of anxieties, and dewilderments and resentments among a people who are not only forbidden to contribute to their own government but are not allowed even to understand the motives and purposes of the policies forced upon them. This is a contrast which must tell increasingly in Britain’s favour as the war goes on.”

Tlie King’s Aspiration. “It is, as it has always been, my desire that the war should not last one day longer than is absolutely necessary. The larger purposes for which my peoples are now fighting are to secure that Europe, may be redeemed, in the words of my Prime Minister in the United Kingdom, ‘from perpetually recurring fear of German aggression, so as to enable the peoples of Europe to preserve their independence and their liberties,’ and to prevent for the future resort to force instead of to pacific means in settlement of international disputes. The elements which in- the opinion of my Governments must form part of any settlement emerge clearly and distinctly from these declarations of policy. Should your Majesty be able to communicate to me any proposals from Germany of such a character as to afford real prospect of achieving the purpose I have described above, I can say at once that my Governments would give them their most earnest consideration." —King George VI. Whom Are We Fighting?

“M’e must end the war in such a way that the only grievances which the Germans have are against their own rulers, agains their leader, and against the system which has again brought them to defeat. The problem thereafter will be to see whether Germany can ever be brought to the same standard of civilization as we are fighting for today. If the peace has been a just one we can safely leave that to the coming generation. M’hen I left Germany my experience was that there was no hatred among the mass of the German people against England as there was in 1914. lam sorry to say that my information is that that has been greatly changed in the last two months, thanks to the propaganda of Dr. Goebbels. Be that as it may, I find here in England very little signs of hostility to Germans as distinct from Hitlerism.” —Sir Nevile Henderson, late Ambassador to Berlin. A Moral Advantage.

“The total population of Britain between the ages of sixteen and sixtyfour is now about five and a half millions greater than it was in 1914, so that a very considerable expansion of output is possible before we shall reach the peak of our effort. The other factor has an important bearing on the problem of the utilization of manpower, and it is one in which we have an advantage over’ the enemy. This is a struggle for freedom, and we are a free people with free institutions. We have as our partners the free organizations of employers and . workpeople carrying on their work for the nation in the way they themselves have chosen. ■Of course, employers and workpeople sometimes have their differences, and on occasion they express their arguments very but when they have hammered out the. points at issue, and have reached agreement, they go to work with a will that is far more effective than anything a regimented and dragooned industry can achieve.” —Mr. Ernest Brown, Minister of Labour, in the “Sunday Times.”

“I Was a Pacifist.” “During and after the last war I was a pacifist on Christian grounds and took an active part in pacifist propaganda. -The development of events compelled me to reconsider my position,” writes the Rev. Hugh Martin in “The Christian As Soldier.” “The pacifist is so moved by the evil of the use of military force, that he is in danger of ■ forgetting other evils, to my mind no less terrible —the enslavement of whole nations, the torture of individuals, the suppression of freedom of thought and life;' the prostitution of learning to the service of national aggrandisement. M’e cannot force freedom upon nations that do not want it, but we might do something to prevent those nations from extinguishing the freedom of others. The innocent will suffer in any armed conflict. But more innocent people may suffer if you shrink from it. You do not get rid of evil by saying you will not fight against it. Is aggression to go until every nation is converted to pacifist principles, and should the unscrupulous meanwhile be allowed to ride roughshod over the world? Is it certain that it is the duty of a Christian to allow an aggressor to destroy the civilization and spiritual heritage of his nation? That is not, unhappily, a hypothetical question in the modern world.”