BRITAIN'S PART IN THE WAR

Waikato Times, Volume 88, Issue 13659, 13 December 1917, Page 5

BRITAIN'S PART IN THE WAR

MR ASQUITH URGES THAT IT WAS WORTH WHILE TO FIGHT.

ONLY IF BRITAIN'S ORIGINAL PURPOSES ARE ATTAINED

ENEMY PEOPLES IN THE DARK REGARDING THE ALLIES' OBJECTS

THE INDEPENDENCE OR PEACEFUL ENTERPRISE OF GERMANY NOT THREATENED.

THE SYSTEM WHICH ENTHRONES FORCE AND BREAKS SOLEMN , PACTS MUST END.

THERE MUST BE SOMETHING MORE THAN A SCRAP OF PAPER

(Australian and New Zealand and Reuter.) Received December 12, 11.5 p.m. LONDON, December 12

Mr Asquith, speaking at Birmingham, said history asks was it worth Britain's while to enter the war. He answered undoubtedly Yes, but only provided the war ended in a peace securing the attainment of Britain's original purposes and containing in itself safeguards for its own permanence. Such a peace was the world's supreme need, and there was no greater enemy to humanity than any one who by word or act made it more difficult to achieve. Referring to Lord Lansdowne's letter, he paid a tribute to Lord Lansdowne's patriotism. He said he himself had no knowledge of the letter till it was published, and had no responsibility for its terms. Much criticism had arisen owing to reading into the letter meanings and intentions which he did not understand it to convey. He thought Lord Lansdowne's main argument was that the Allies, while warring vigorously, should make it increasingly clear to the world that their own war aims were national and unselfish and that by the attainment of them we were convinced that the world might look for a durable peace safeguarded by conjoint authority of an international league. Even now there was abundant evidence that the enemy peoples were kept in the dark regarding our real purposes, both for war and peace. He would continue to do what he could to raise the veil and let in the light.

Mr Asquith proceeded to point out that nobody threatened the existence or independence of peaceful enterprise in Germany. What we were concerned with was the system which enthroned force as the sovereign authority and held itself free to pursue its supposed interests, and falsify, deride, or supersede according to the exigencies of the houir, the most solemn pacts. This systciii must end. Germany must learn that it will not pay. If it is to be real and enduring a pact must be something more than a paper document. Another misconception is that the Allies—especially Britain —are aiming at the destruction of what is vaguely called the freedom of the seas. In peace time the seas are open to mariners of all nations. What stipulations would Britain propose in peace terms to curtail or fetter this immemorial right? The formula can only be used to indicate a new limitation in war time upon the belligerent rights of the Power which happens to command the seas. Where existing conventions of a most solemn character have been systematically violated by the enemy it is worth while considering whether something might not be done to secure the freedom of the seas from the prosecution of a lawless, infamous submarine campaign.