THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1915. ANOTHER OUTBURST.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17239, 15 February 1918, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1915. ANOTHER OUTBURST.

The New Zealand Tablet this week gravely charges the British press—including, wo presume, the press of New Zealand —with being mendacious, foolish, and dishonourable in its references to the war. That there may bo no mistako about it we reproduce our contemporary's own words as contained in the following passage: — The press began- a campaign of lies three years ago and never oneo paused since. With absolute disregard for honour and truth and chivalry it set itself to stir up racial hatred and to spread broadcast calumnies against our enemies which have inudo us despicable- and contemptible in the eyes of the world. All tho while, too, tliero has boon an intolerable drum-beating and blaring of trumpets in praise of our own soldiers, of victories that were never won, of virtues that never existed, and a shamel&ss cloaking of vices and atrocities almost as fcad as thogo wo denounce in our enemies and often invent for them. Honourable men havo been sickened by tho incessant efforts of irresponsible scril;os and platform orators to undo the work of Christ Whose lalw it is that we should love our enemies and to destroy in us tho knightly tradition of braver and bettor men who could find virtues and good qualities in their bitterest foos.

The Tablet somewhat discounts tho value of its admonition that we shonJd love our enemies by its own editorial references in tho same issue to Sir Edward Carson—" Carson " as it calls him —as "the German agent of Ulster, the man who suborned the officers of the English army to mutiny, the importer of German guns," and so on, and by an allusion to tho "idiocy" of Sir 1»\ E. Smith, tho British Attorney-general. Wo are not greatly exercieed, however,

about the application by tho Now Zealand Tablet in its own columns of ih<Law it quotes for observance by others. What does necessarily concern, us is the Lmpiitai ion that "calumnies" have been '' spread broadcast against our enemies" in tho British press, that tho press has shamelessly lied about our enemies with tho object of stirring up racial hatred, and that it lias a.s shamelessly covered up "vices and atrocities" by tho British which havo boon " almost ns bad as those wo denounce in our enemies and often invent."

Since tho Tablet has taken upon itpclf to defend the reputation of our enemies against calumny, it is to be hoped that it will do them the justice also of show- j ing wherein they have been maligned. Doos tho Tablet refuse to accept the testimony of Cardinal -aorcier respecting tho atrocities which were committed by the Germans in Belgium ? Does it reject tho testimony of Bishop Cloary of Auckland, founded on inquiries made personally by himself in France respecting tho practice of "ruthlessness" and " terrorisation" against non-com-batants in that country? Does it reject the conclusions that were arrived at, after the careful sifting of the evidence tendored to it, by the committee which, under Viscount Bryce, re-ported upon tho allegations of German outrages P Does it dismiss, as "calumnies," all the reports concerning the deliberate destruction by the Germans of merchant vessels, involving tho loss of hundreds of lives of defenceless civilians' —men, women, and children—to whom tho protection of international law is supposed to bo accorded? Does it reject the reports concerning tho destruction by shell-fire of sailors of tho cantile marine as they attempted to escape in open boats from tho wrecks of their vessels? Does it reject, also, the reports concerning the destruction by the Germans of vessels bearing the sacred symbol of tho Hed Cross ? Doos it reject, further, tho reports of atrocities perpetrated by Austrians and Bulgarians in tho Balkans and of atrocities perpetrated by the Turks in Armenia? Without extending the record, a-s we might easily do, we ask whether the Tablet suggests that any of these stories have be-on " invented" for tho purpose of stirring up racial hatred, and whether it is tho credence which, we have given to them that has, as it affirms, " mado us despicable and contemptible in the eyes of the world." Wo deny, as a matter of fact, that the British have incurred the contempt of tho world. The Tablet is the first newspaper published under the British flag which has, so far as we know, made any such assertion as this, and we are a Little curious to know xipon what grounds it has ventured to base it.

Not content, however, with representing that the enemy nations have been unjustly aspersed, tho Tablet sees fit to belittle the British and allied armies, to allege that they have been credited with victories which were " never won" and with virtues which "never existed," and to impute to them " vices and atrocities almost as bad as those we denounce in our enemies." What, we are justified in asking, are those "vices and atrocities?" Where is the evidence of them? Does any evidence of them exist? Is the allegation regarding these "vices and atrocities " on the part of our soldiers only an incident in "a campaign of lies?" We await the answer of the Tablet on this point also. Our contemporary has not only made serious reflections on tho honour of the British press by imputing to it the ignoble course of stirring up racial hatred by the publication of "calumnies" against our enemies, but has also brought grave charges against " our own soldiers." The matter cannot rest there. Nor, of course, would our contemporary, which would have us believe that it possesses a lofty regard for honour and truth and chivalry, desire that it should do so.