Part 27 (1/2)

Has not Germany only herself to blame? If she had respected the eternal principles of Divine Morals; if she had been contented of her lot and mindful of the rights of other nations; if she had been guided by the true law that Right is above Might; if she had followed the ever glorious path of Justice, she would not be presently under the ban of the civilized world rising in a mighty effort to crush her threatening tyranny out of existence.

So much the worse for her, if she falls a victim to her insane ambitious dreams and to the atrocious crimes they have inspired her to commit. In her calamity, the Nationalists' sympathies will avail her very little, as they will everywhere meet with the contempt they fully deserve.

At page 116, in a virulent charge, Mr. Boura.s.sa says that Mr. Wilson _though a pa.s.sionate and obstinate pedantic of democracy, is as much of an autocrat as William of Prussia_.

Blinded by his fanatical antipathies towards every one and every thing, directly or indirectly, favouring England, the Nationalist leader fails to see any difference between the man who blasphemously claims by Divine Right the power to hurl his whole Empire at the throat of staggering Humanity, to satisfy his frenzied l.u.s.t of domination, denying to his subjects any say whatever in the matter, and the responsible chief of State who, holding his temporary functions from the expressed will of the people who trusted him, calls upon that same nation to avenge the murder of a large number of her citizens, of her women and children, and the barbarous crimes committed in violation of her Sovereign Rights.

If Mr. Boura.s.sa is conscious of the enormity of the stand he has taken, and of the views he has expressed, he is indeed much to be blamed; if he is not, he is greatly to be pitied.

At page 109 of his pamphlet--ent.i.tled:--”_The Pope, arbiter of peace_,”

Mr. Boura.s.sa has written the following monstrous proposition, after having said that peace must be restored ”_without victory_”:--

”_The more the results of the war are null, for both sides, the more chances there are for the peoples, astounded at the frightful uselessness of those monstrous slaughters, to protect themselves against a new fit of furious folly. To become odious to men, war must be barren._”

So Mr. Boura.s.sa has emphatically proclaimed that the war must be barren of any practical results, that the extraordinary sacrifices of lives, of resources of wealth, must be without reward of any kind; that the world must return to the ante-war conditions. And this, he a.s.serts, would be the best means of preventing a renewal of the monstrous slaughters which have been the outcome of Germany's horrible attempt at dominating an enslaved Humanity.

In all sincerity, it is very difficult to suppose that the exponent of such outrageously abominable views is conscious of what he says.

A red hot ”pacifist,” Mr. Boura.s.sa clamoured as best he could for ”PEACE WITHOUT VICTORY,” claiming that it was _the only kind of peace that could be ”just and durable.”_ The time was when he pretended--surely without any show of reason--that such was the sort of peace Mr. Wilson wanted and suggested.

Even as far back as December 31, 1915, Mr. Boura.s.sa, no doubt desirous of giving full vent to his new year's wishes to all, had written:--

”_In spite of the lies, of the impudent ”bluff,” of the sanguinary appeals and of the false promises of victory of the partisans of war to excess, in all the warring countries, popular good sense commences to discern truth.... The more victory_ (the issue) _will be materially null and sterile for all the nations at war, the more chances there will be that peace will be lasting and that the peoples will be convinced that war is not only an abominable crime but an incommensurable folly_.”

Evidently it had already become a hobby on the brain of the Nationalist leader. He dogmatically proclaims that war between peoples--not the wars formerly fought by mercenary armies,--is a _crime_,--_abominable_,--and a _folly_,--_incommensurable_.

True it is on the part of a State tramping upon all the principles of Justice and of International Law to gratify her guilty ambition.

But honourable, glorious, is war on the part of peoples rising in their patriotic might to resist a sanguinary enemy, to defend their countries, their homes, their mothers, their wives and their children from oppression, to stem the conquering efforts of barbarous invaders.

No doubt it was a crime on the part of Germany to break her pledged honour by solemn treaties, and to violate Belgium's territory.

No doubt it was a crime for Germany--and one abominable--to overrun Belgium, spreading everywhere desolation, devastation, incendiarism, murder.

But can it be said that the admirable and heroic resistance Belgium has opposed to her tyrannical invaders was a dastardly crime?

No doubt it was a crime--and one most abominable--for Germany to order the sinking of the Lusitania and hundreds of merchant s.h.i.+ps, without the warning required by the Law of Nations, murdering by hundreds non-combatants, children, women, and old men.

But can any one be justified in a.s.serting that, after exhausting, for the redress of such abominable wrongs, all the resources of diplomacy, the United States were committing a crime when they accepted the criminal teutonic challenge and decided to join with the British Empire, with France, Italy and their Allies, to rescue human Freedom and Civilization from the impending destruction?

It is an aberration of mind--incommensurable in depth--for a publicist, or any one else, to be so blinded by prejudices, so lost to all sense of justice, as to place on the same footing, on the same level, the a.s.sailant and he who defends his all, the murderer and the victim.

I positively affirm that I am not actuated by the least ill-will or ill-feeling against the Nationalist leader, in judging his course and his views as I do. Thank G.o.d, I know enough of the teachings of Christianity to wish good to all men. But I cannot help being deeply sorry and deploring that one of my French Canadian compatriots is buried in such mental darkness as to be unable to perceive the difference--incommensurable--there is in the present war between the hideous Teutonic guilt, and the commendable and meritorious defence by the Allied nations of the most sacred cause on earth:--outraged Justice.

And with all sincerity, I express the profound wish that during the prolonged recess the timely war measure adopted to censure and prevent all utterances detrimental to the best Canadian effort in the conflict, the Nationalist leader has the pleasure to enjoy, he will reconsider the whole situation and his opinions--too much widely circulated. Is it yet possible to hope that, at last, he will see the dawn which will lead him to the full light with which the great and n.o.ble cause of his country and of the world is s.h.i.+ning?

It is no surprise that such opinions utterly failed to have any echo amongst the liberty loving people of the neighbouring Republic. They died their merited shameful death before crossing over the boundary line, buried deep under the heap of the profound feelings of reprobation they provoked.

The Nationalist leader even missed the mark where he felt sure his shot would strike. We can rest a.s.sured that the large majority of the United States Germans, by birth or origin, would not change the responsible President of their new country for the autocrat Kaiser from whose absolutist power so many of them fled to breathe freely in the new land of promise it was their happy lot to enter.

Mr. Boura.s.sa met with a complete failure in his expectation to arouse the feelings of his compatriots over the frontier against the intervention of the Republic in the war.