The Daily News. THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 1900. THE SOLUTION OF THE WAR.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXII, Issue 54, 15 March 1900, Page 2

The Daily News. THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 1900. THE SOLUTION OF THE WAR.

In these days when dissuasion on the war assumes such a multitude of phases, and the controversy rages around a dozen different aspects of the question, it is refreshing to come across a summary of the matter which, while justly and temperately dealing with the national interests and questions involved in the war, speaks' a right word as to the shame that in the nineteenth century we should have to resort to such a pitiable method of settling international disputes. We allude to the following eloquent and common sense remarks nude by the Rev. Dr. H. Pereira Mendes at the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue, New York, in December last in the couise of a sermon on " The Solution of War: What the Defeat of England would mean for Anglo-American Civilisation and Interests ":—" Dr. Mendes advanced the theory of an international supreme court of arbitration, which, he said, would lead continually to the Bible as a 'solution of war.' He said in part: Many are they who hope that Britain will be beaten. Germany and Eussia see her punished for greed that bids her grasp for brave men's lands. They forget Poland, the land they robbed of her independence. France rejoices at England's distress; France, the land of shame that earned the contempt of all who heard the word 'Dreyfus'— France, whose vile, obscene attacks on Britain's Queen, whose age as well as] whose pure womanhood should protect her in the eyes of manly men—France rejoices at Britain's defeat. If England fights for land greed, no word will I say to defend her. But let France that robbed Italy of Nice 100 years ago and again forty years ago, and Germany of Alsace and Lorraine 200 years ago; let Germany that robbed Austria of Silesia ; let Austria, which helped to rob Denmark of Schleswig-Holstein; let Russia, which has robbed Turkey as Turkey has robbed many a province; let the United States, whose page of Indian reading is not righteous—let all, I say, reflect, and each shall by its national conscience stand condemned. But America must not lose sight of this fact: that Britain beaten means an end to the supremacy of the Englishspeaking races; America alone cannot hope for successful expansion singlehanded against Frank, Teuton, and Russ. But for England at Manila and elsewhere complications most awkward for this country would have arisen. I claim that the hope of the world for human rights, human progress ( and material progress depends upon the supremacy of English-speaking races. Would you look for human rights and mankind's material progress to the Latin or the Frank, whose men have written hate and injustice, prejudice and obscenity, as chief words on the pages of their history in the closing years of this century ? Or would you look to Germany, where militarism is the curse? or to Russia, where Nihilism and Siberia tell the awful truths? Speak not of France's love for America over 100 years ago; it was less her love for us than her hate of England. I repeat this country must expand, but by legitimate means; but without her ally—allied by common language, by descent, by literature, by love for liberty and reverence for religion—without her natural ally the British Empire, neither Frank nor Teuton nor Russ will hesitate to thwart her. Not less do the Boers deserve our honour. They are fighting for their independence. They may be narrow in their ideas of government, but narrowness is not a crime. Here, then, we have two brave foes, each commanding sympathy, each touching the heartstrings of every good man and woman, because the echoes of this war are, as always, widows' cries, orphans' wailings, the anguish of wounded men, and the groans of men stricken with disease. •Oh, the pity of it! Oh, the shame that the nineteenth century and men cannot find a way to avoid war and maintain peace with honour! As Americans we must regret this contest. As men and women we must lament it. But as Hebrews we say there is no need for it. We exclaim: ' O thou sword, how long will it be ere thou be quiet ? Put up thyself into thy scabbard, rest and be still.' And I speak to you that you may do your little toward influencing , the promotion of international arbitration, and the abolition of the pi esent monstrous method of settling national '

disputes." It says something for the hopefulness of the situation that these sentiments have been quoted with warm approval by the Anglo-American Press, and by not a few Colonial journals. There aro signs, too, that orn e the excitement caused by the present war hasettled down, the Press of the world will pay increasing attention to the question of how war may be avoided by the establishment of a less inhuman I method of adjusting international! grievances. As an instance of this we I quote from a contemporary the following j letter which Utety appeared in a well-!-

known and influential Continents journal, L'lndependence. The writei the Baron d'Estourelles (lately sede tary to the French Legation ii London, and French delegate to Thi Hague Peace Conference), says : ;l 1 know it is not enough to touch wit] me's finger the sores of Europeai lociety ; one must be able to point ou i remedy if one wishes to avoid causinj ler, in her despair, to seek a way ou >f her difficulties through violence Co expect Governments who rely 01 >ublic opinion for their support tt lacrifice the present to the future, is fc >xpect the impossible. AU live mor >r less from day to day. The best o ihem go the fastest, but all are obligei o subordinate the future interest o iheir countries to the immediat ixigenoies of an opinion which is, a ihe best, uneducated. The great thinj ihen is to educate public opinion ii >rder that it may compel its Govern nent to adopt a policy worthy of th< lame; and push it, and by degree, )blige it, to find peaceful solutions o questions which divide it from others in order, in other words, that it ma; substitute for the barbarous and tyran aical test of war a peaceful and judicia tribunal. Public opinion is marchinj with giant strides in this direction. 1 pear ago one could not, without appear ing ridiculous, express such hopes am ireams. To-day the human race ha ilready a vague suspicion that it ha jverything to lose by war. The con lict in the Transvaal, contrary t< ippearances, has come to confirm thii suspicion, for it has proved bey»nc loubt that although you may momeniaiily carry public opinion otf its feet, rou can no longer bri*g back the f orner glories of war. War will grow nore and more hated, if not by the few vho profit by it, at any rate by the nasses who suffer from it. ■ . , Without knowing it, England has once igain rendered civilisation a great ;ervice, and I cannot help thinking hat the unexpected experience that he has undergone, to her cost, will not ;e lost upon other nations.".