The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1912. THE KAISER AS PACIFIST.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 175, 11 December 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1912. THE KAISER AS PACIFIST.

Two opposite views are current of the German Emperor. One represents him as the "war lord," the wielder of the "mailed fist," the devotee of the "Cod of Battles"—the every type and embodiment of arrogant militarism. This is the conception of the ordinary English newspaper reader. The other conception of the Kaiser regards him as the "Peace Emperor." It is widely current in Germany, where he is, in consequence, suspected by the Pan-Germans; in France, where he is really popular, and, to some extent, in England. All the

leading pacifists in every country seem to Lave great hopes of the Kaiser; Baron d'Estournelles de Constant, who is his intimate friend, Mr. Carnegie, the Baroness von Suttner, and—more particularly —Herr Alfred Fried, whose book on Llx: Kaiser now appears for the first time in English dress. Herr Fried is the leading German pacifist, and has received the Nobel Peace Prize. He has worked for years in the face of calumny and abuse, and cannot be suspected of prejudice in favor of the Kaiser, or of the Prussianism of which the Kaiser is the fountain-head. Yet his belief in the Kaiser is such that he is inclined to | hail him as the future "saviour of Europe," the monarch who, alone among Western statesmen and heads of States, lias the force of will, and perhaps the disposition, to abolish war in Europe, and to consolidate the civilised nations. Herr Fried's thesis is not mere fantasy; it is based upon a mass of evidence drawn from the Kaiser's many utterances—public and private—during ' the last twenty odd years. It is not merely that the Kaiser's reign of a quarter of a century has not been stained by bloodshed. Little stress is laid on this argument by the author, who perceives that it is double-edged. The credit for the forty years of unbroken peace in Western Europe cannot go to Germany alone; her neighbors may also claim their share. The Kaiser cannot come out into the open as a prophet; but again and again he has shown, to use Herr Fried's phrase,

that "lie is convinced of tlie necessity of a united Europe, and is considering the problem." A famous instance is his interview with M. Pichon, the French Foreign Minister, in London, at the time of King Edward's funeral. A report of that interview, which appeared in the Matin, was substantially correct. The Kaiser, it said, had expounded his favorite theory to the French Minister—"that the people of Europe should, in the interests of humanity and civilisation, live in co-operation with each other, and join in forming a great and peaceful federation." The Kaiser's predilection for England and things English is a commonplace. It has been his life-long endeavor to bring about a conciliation with France. As far back as 1890, he said to M. Jules Simon: "Anyone who seeks to drive our two nations into war is a fool and a criminal." Not long afterwards, M. Jules Simon was advocating in the Figaro a truce of God with Germany until the end of the century. Only recently, when M. Cambon took up his post as French Ambassador in Berlin, the Emperor declared, in answer to his address, that "to establish an understanding between our two great nations, both of whom are able, and destined, to spread civilisation among the peoples of the world, is an aim, the accomplishment of which is worthy of the efforts of all highminded persons in France and Germany." Still, it remains true that the Kaiser believes in armaments. What, then, becomes. it may be asked, of his pacifism? The Kaiser himself has furnished the clue. Two years ago he publicly identified himself with the opinions expressed in an article in the Deutsche Revue, entitled, "Modern The writer was Count von SchlielTen, a former Chief of the German General Staff. Roughly, the Count's ideas were those of the late M. de Bloch, though he gives the argument a \lifferent turn. The colossal growth of armies and armaments has made war impossible among the leading nations. ''Armies have become so big, and weapons so powerful," wrote Count SchlielTen, "that a war between equally matched States opens up a prospect of unparalleled cruelty and enormous waste; the monetary loss would be counted in milliards, and the sacrifice of life by the hundred thousand; economic life would he'paralysed." In these circumstances, no great nation dare invoke a decision by arms. The wall of fortresses and bayonets that has been drawn across Europe is itself a guarantee of peace. "The arms factories, the gun foundries, the steam-hammers which temper the armor plates, have produced more friendly countenances, and have been the cause of more sincere rapprochements than all the Peace Congresses put together." The Kaiser's adhesion to this view does not disturb Herr Fried. He points out that militarism that denies the possibility of war is militarism reduced to absurdity. "The Chief of the General Staff," Herr Fried writes, "considered only the military aspect; but the Emperor must go gurther. He will examine the situation also from the political side. Perhaps the fact that he has repeatedly emphasised the necessity for a closer agreement between the nations is based upon his understanding of the military situation." Here and now it may be true to say that high armaments create a sort of deadlock of peace; but the burden is already becoming too gf-eat: the game cannot be carried on indefinitely; in ten or twenty years the limit of endurance will be reached. The purpose and value of Herr Fried's book is that it shows that the Kaiser is conscious of the problem, and is not unlikely to be the man who will call the nations to their senses.