THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES. TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1917. "PEACE WITH A FREE GERMANY."

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17064, 24 July 1917, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES. TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1917. "PEACE WITH A FREE GERMANY."

The speech delivered by Mr Lloyd George at the Queen's Hall, in which he replied to the utterances of the Imperial German Chancellor respecting Germany's war aims and her attitude in relation to peace terms, furnished an excellent and characteristic example of the Prime Minister's capacity for trenchant criticism. It may. be likened to i a broadside, indeed, that literally rakes I the German position fore and aft, and leaves the German Government without oovor. More than that, it was a speech breathing—despite fresh occurrences of an untoward nature in Russia—a spirit of confidence in which all the allied peoples will rejoice. It offered, also, for the benefit of the German people some interesting remarks about which, however, they will learn nothing if their own Government can possibly help it. Mr Lloyd George's exposure of the element of "sham" underlying the pro-' fessions of Dr Michaelis was pitiless and masterly. The Germany which is desirous of peace is the same insincere, unscrupulous, and voracious Germany as ever. Germany will try to get out of the war as treacherously as she entered it. But she is in the toils, and the Allies now know how to judge her both by what her Government utters and by what it omits to utter. Perhaps the most interesting portion of Mr Lloyd George's speech is found in the passages in which he traversed and enlarged upon the claim that Germany is fighting for freedom and independence. If Germany is sincere in desiring these things she will find the enemy not without but within her own gates. In the years to come the German people may realise that it was the Allies that helped them to a freedom and independence such as they know little of At the present time. At least we hope this will be the case. As Mr Lloyd George put it, her rulers and not the Allies are the enemies of freedom in Germany. Prom this statement the Prime Minister proceeded to an arresting pronouncement: *We could make peace with a free Germany, but cannot do so with a Germany dominated by an autocracy It is now a struggle between a group of democracies and free men and a group of nations governed by a military autocracy." It is possible to read a great deal into these words, which seem, indeed, to be open to the interpretation that Germany need not hope for peace as long as the Hohenzollerns hold their present place. Perhaps we should read this declaration by Mr Lloyd George in conjunction with his previous assertion that the form of Germany's Government is the affair of the German people. In so far as it is aimed at Germany's dominant autocracy, in which the Kaiser is the central figure, it expressed what has been said before, if in different terms, by the head of the British Government. It was about a year ago that Mr Asquith, speaking in the House of Commons with reference to the execution of Captain Fryatt, said that the Government was determined when the time arrived to bring to justice the criminals, whoever they might be and whatever position they might occupy, and he added—"ln such cases as these the authors of the system under which such crimes are committed may well be the most guilty of all." Manifestly the finger was pointed at the Kaiser, the House of Eohenzollern, and those heads of the Prussian army, navy, and bureaueracy who hold their positions as the Emperor's nominees. The feeling among the allied peoples that if then, be any justice on earth the head and forefront of the offending forces, the Hohenzollerns themselves, should be plucked from their seat and cast into outer darkness cannot be other than strong and widespread. But neither Mi Lloyd George nor Mr Asquith nor yet President Wilson, when in his famous war Bpeech to Congress he drew a clear distinction between the German Government and the German people in his explanation of the quarrel of the United States with her present enemy, can really be definitely hold to have implied that peace cannot be consummated until such vengeance is literally meted out. The spirit of a whole nation cannot be ohanged in a day. The German people will awaken no doubt by degrees and cast off the autocratic bonds that enslave them at present, but the process may not be sensational. As a nation they are saturated with traditions of monarchical power which they will not! easily forget. Dr Dillon goes so far as to say in the June number of the Contemporary Review that "to-dayno other people on the Continent of Europe possesses a- State so firmly compacted, so highly organised, so efficiently led towards'ideals for which we and our allies

profess abhorrence but -which are revered and striven after by every Teuton subject of the Kaiser." Thero has been little evidence so far that tho Germans are tired of their rulers, even if they may appear to bo realising the necessity of curtailing their power. And it is difficult to see how they are going to be influenced by Mr Lloyd George's advice to free themselves from the domination of an autocracy icfore they ask tho Allies to discuss peace, since it iB only too probable that they are incapable at the present time of taking any such stand, owing to their long and complete subjection to an. autocratic and military rule. Like the British the Germans may yet learn to enjoy tho blessings of democracy under a monarchical system. That, as Mr Lloyd George says, is their affair. Would this result, should there be convincing assurance of its achievement, be considered by the Allies a satisfactory vindication of their war aims so far as the Hohenzollerns and their capacity for evil-doing are concerned? On the other hand, is it conceivable that the Allies would refuse to make peace with a Germany which conceded all the conditions demanded of her while still electing to be ruled by tho present dynasty? It may be recalled in this connection, as an interests ing historical incident, that the Allies who finally overthrew Napoleon made and published an agreement that they would not recognise, or discuss any terms with, Napoleon himself. His elimination became the condition precedent to any peace for France, and when it was achieved France was admitted to negotiate, and allowed to take part in the Congress of Vienna. It has been suggested that the Allies of to-day might not find it impossible to repeat this policy with the necessary modifications. But the circumstances in the two cases are so different, despite points of strong similarity, that this doubtless explains why any discussion of the idea seems to have languished. That Germany's Augean stable must be satisfactorily cleansed before peace can come is at present, however, the ultimatum of the Allies, and if the details of the process involved are left in part to Germany herself the onus lies only the more seriously upon her people.