THE Grey River Argus. PUBLISHED DAILY. MONDAY, APRIL 24, 1899.

Grey River Argus, Volume LVII, Issue 10266, 24 April 1899, Page 2

THE Grey River Argus. PUBLISHED DAILY. MONDAY, APRIL 24, 1899.

Although we do not bdieve in the Cz^'s profession cf peace nevertheless we abhor war. No sensible man is in favor of a resort to arms on any subject. It ia far preferable to refer any difficulty that might crop up to arbitration. We only reiterate a truism when we say the nations of Europe are groaning under the burden imposed on them to keep up their armaments to a state of effioienoy sufficient to guarantee

,an "armed peace." War is a more expensive luxury now-a-days than it has ever been because of the vast improvements made in implements of destruction and the numerical strength of the different armies and navies. The annual cost of the present, war system of Europe Jhas been estimated at Ll per head for every man woman and child in that continent, and this is all s penfc unproductiyely, doing good to no one. This is in the time of peace alone. Were war to break but the cost would perhaps be tentold let alone the- indirect suffering from an outbreak of hostilities. The curse of the world is the present preparation for war. It is calculated that 17,000j000 of men could be brought under arms at a very short notice. Recently Mr J Balfour stated that these bloated armaments were necessary to the preservation of peace, though he has somewhat modified his position since and publicly stated that he would co-oper-ate with the Czar to bring about a reduction of armaments. One of the most trenchant articles that has appeared in the Press of the Colony on the subject was published by the Mastevtoh Star. We make no apology for freely quoting from."it v The writer^ goes on to say — Ask the great .mass .of people in any country ii they : wish to go to war with the people of any other country, or if they expect any'advantage or profit, to accrue to them supposing war did break out, and they would answer that they had nothing to gain by war. But not only have they nothing to gain, but ; everything to lose by war. In the Franco-German war 80,000 Germans were killed, and the French Minister did riot . -hesitate to say that he went to warfor an idea. It is now admitted that the' Crimean 3 War was a mistake," arising irom a misconception of the political position/ at the time. But thisjmistake was paid for in ; the .blood, suffering, and treasure of the English , people..; At the time the soldiers were dying from want and privation in the trenches before Sabastopol the labourers .were dying from starvation at home on account of the enhanced pripe of . corn arising from the war with Russia., To strengthen this argument let the people of this country ask themselves what advantage Would.they": gain if war were to break out between England and Russia? We, have then reached this posicion, that tLe" inhabit ants of the different, nations of the world have no .desire ; ; f or - iwar, have nothing to gain by it, but are forced into it against their will, and whatever may be the result undergo intense suffering, privation and loss. At Wat-rloo after the contest 10,000 British troops lay on the battlefield dying and wounded. The spectacle was so horrible that it drew tears from the eyes of a General so hardened to war as the Duke of Wellington was. If the people do not want war why does it arise ? What are the immediate causes of war ? History furnishes us with an answer to this enquiry. Wars have arisen from the ambition or lust of power of sovereigns or their ministers. ; At the present time Lord Salisbury might in volve the whole of the British Empire in a war about the merits of" which the people would know nothing until hostilities had actually broken out. If Mr J Chamberlain were Premier he would not scruple to engage in war for "potential" market. Does it then, not stand to reason that the Government of no country should go to war unless, the people had been previously consulted, and before hostilities actually commenced the point in dispute should first be submitted to arbitration ? Let the people of the various nations insist on these conditions and war would very soon cease, . and standing armies would follow in their waks. In refutation of this plea the recent Span-ish-American war might be quoted as an iustance arising from the wish of the nation and not from the intrigue of court. But the circumstancesjwhich led to this war would never have arisen if such a country as Spain had nob been allowed to perpetrate her iniquity under the connivance of Europe. If they had dared the European Powers would have iuterfered to prevent the Great. Republic from liberating Cuba and the Philippines from the foul tyranny of oue of the most backward countries in the world. The position then is clear. There is no absolute necessity for war. The cau3e arises from certain persons whose interest it is supposed to favor. It is evident from the perusal of the history that sovereigns, the ministers, courts and mistresses have been tho chief instigators of war. Napoleon I has been justly described as a. calamity on two legs, for his war of ambition cost 2,000,000 of lives. It is evident then that the voice of the people will alone make wars to cease. When the voice gives no uncertain sound, when the. people of a nation steadily refuse to supjorc the warlike designs of their sovereign, i when the sovereign knows that his hold on the throne will be very precarious unless he does his level best to put an end to war, and substitute ' arbitration in its place, then we shall behold a change take place in the policy of militarism which at present is the curse of the world. We have seen how the: proposals of the Czar of Russia for disarmament have been received by the Courts of Europe. It is evident from their replies they do not wish the present state of affairs to cease. The yoke is still to remain, and will remain, until a stronger voice is heard, which will shatter for ever a system destructive of the happiness and prosperity of the toiling millions of the universe.