Page images
PDF
EPUB

in charge of Propaganda, but the public were not aware of their escape any more than they realized that we had again avoided Mr. Churchill. Lord Beaverbrook certainly has a genius for making useful and devoted political friends, though these very friendships arouse distrust and encourage his critics to describe his sensational successes as "jobs." His peerage almost caused an émeute in both Houses of Parliament, while his elevation to the Chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster nearly brought down the Government. It is regarded as further, though probably not final, payment for services rendered when Mr. Lloyd George succeeded Mr. Asquith, or, alternatively, as a cynical attempt to prop up a tottering Cabinet by enlisting yet another newspaper proprietor. We know nothing of Lord Beaverbrook, who may be all that his Ministerial friends allege, but we find it difficult to credit his appointment exclusively to merit, nor do we believe him to have the exceptional qualities required for intelligent Propaganda, even if he has the necessary moral.

Government and Press

[ocr errors]

WE are not greatly impressed by all Lord Beaverbrook's appointments in the Propaganda Department, though it is most publicspirited of Lord Northcliffe to undertake such arduous, thankless, and difficult work as Enemy Propaganda." Recent events have brought to a head the long-burning question of the relations between Government and Press, which nowadays take a new form which we believe to be bad both for Government and Press. Their relations used to be confined to more or less friendly and intimate intercourse, which varied according as Ministers were communicative or secretive, between our public men and responsible editors. It was as a general rule a purely political relationship to the mutual advantage of both, and favours were neither solicited nor offered. The Press had not yet made its appearance in the Honours Lists, which was the beginning of the end of its independence in the best sense of that term. Things have now reached this point-that the editor is dropping into the background while the newspaper proprietor is emerging into view, generally a plutocrat hungry for "honours " and even office, with results to the public interests which have grown to the dimensions of a scandal under the Lloyd George regime, as the Prime Minister has a positive craze for the Press, being convinced that, given sufficient jour

nalistic backing, nothing else matters. Thus we see blunders which are almost crimes committed by the Government, some of which are inspired by its Press, which subsequently combines to protect its protégés from the consequences of their own misdeeds. This produces an unhealthy state of things, involving, as it does, misleading the country on vital matters of fact and the falsification of public opinion, which must subsequently recoil upon both Government and Press, destroying the one and inculcating contempt for the other. As our readers are aware, we have never joined in the hue and cry against Lord Northcliffe, who has rendered notable service to the nation at crucial moments of the war, who throughout the war has had but one idea-namely, Victory—and has not been thinking of his own position or prospects nor been infected by that Defeatism to which financiers are addicted. We do, however, sincerely regret that he should impair his influence by so intimately identifying himself with a Government so palpably unable "to stay the course present one. The Northcliffe Press played an infinitely greater part in "gingering up" and finally in bringing down the Old Gang than in "boosting" the New Gang and turning a blind eye to follies that hit us in the face.

Propaganda at Home

[ocr errors]

as the

NOWHERE is propaganda more needed than throughout the industrial districts of the United Kingdom, where Pacifists, Bolsheviks, Boloists, and all the poisonous agents of Defeatism have been given a free run without any antidote. If our Propaganda Department understands its business it will in the first place requisition sailors and soldiers, who are infinitely more effective on the platform to-day than any civilians, however practised. Audiences of all classes have far more respect for Fighting Men than for professional word-spinners. If, for instance, General Hunter Weston could be persuaded to go round the big towns making such an appeal as lately impressed the House of Commons he would do untold good, and, while fully recognizing his capacity in the field, he would, if we may say so, at this juncture do more to win the war by a month's talking in England than by a month's fighting in France. The same observation applies to other distinguished and articulate soldiers who might be spared from the Front for the campaign of education which has been grievously neglected

at the Back, and which they could conduct more successfully than others. Sailors would be no less effective. As Admiral Jellicoe indicated in one of his interesting speeches, the British public, though dependent for their existence upon the sea, are deplorably ignorant of every problem of seapower. They need waking up if we are to have any chance of preventing the continual surrender of vital maritime rights by diplomats whose knowledge of the ocean is limited to an occasional Channel crossing. In this connexion we would beg our readers' attention to Mr. Cope Cornford's convincing exposition of our neglected naval interests, which, speaking as a naval expert, he declares only two members of the present mammoth Ministry have any grasp of namely, the brothers Geddes. Fresh minds have their advantages.

Bolo

THE trial of that strange adventurer who called himself by the grotesque name of "Bolo Pasha" was at first treated by the Press as a first-class joke, and the Paris correspondents deluged us with spicy accounts of the accused's foppish appearance and mannerisms, and it was hinted that he was having the best of his "sprightly encounters" with the solemn prosecution. But their tone changed as the case developed and it was realized how grave an episode it was, not only from the point of view of France, but equally from that of her Allies, who have undoubtedly suffered from one or other form of Boloism, though so far no other Allied Government has had sufficient grit to grapple with this plague. Clemenceaus are not common. The Bolo trial soon ceased to be a laughing matter for Bolo or any of his friends-who became eager to disclaim a compromising connexion. After an exhaustive hearing he was condemned to death for treason, being convicted of the revolting crime of taking 11,000,000 francs, which he knew came from Germany, for Pacifist propaganda in France through the medium of certain newspapers which he was to buy in German interests. The defence, needless to say, was that, although Bolo might have taken money the origin of which he suspected, it was merely covetousness, and he had no intention of working against France, but this was "too thin" for the court martial, though the accused has not yet been finally disposed of, as there is the usual appeal. One result of the case was the arrest of Senator Charles Humbert,

against whom proceedings were pending for deriving from Bolo the funds with which he bought Le Journal, which funds, as we now know, came from Germany. Other people in other countries should be getting uncomfortable, though so far Mr. Lloyd George appears to have contented himself with exhorting everybody else to "look out for Boloism." It came out in the trial that Bolo had made efforts in England; complaint was made that "Roberts" had treated him "badly." It seems incredible that there should not have been extensive activities on this side of the Channel, where the confiding character of the Briton, official and unofficial, affords golden opportunities to enemy agents, especially those disguised as "Neutrals or "Allies."' Von Kühlmann knows London too well to neglect it, though it is argued that as natural perversity makes so many of our " political cranks work for Germany, it is unnecessary for her to spend money here.

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

AMONG Some discouraging symptoms, it is something that the submarine campaign against British shipping should, taking one

Submarine
Statistics

[ocr errors]

quarter with another, tend to decrease in severity, though we must always remember that every ship sunk appreciably increases the strain upon those above water, save in so far as there may be new shipping, as to which we are imperfectly informed, though it is not developing too well. We have now had the results of one year of unrestricted" U-boat warfare, which was proclaimed by the German Government to begin on February 1, 1917, during which, according to the Admiralty figures, the total number of British merchant ships sunk was 1118, of which 822 were over 1600 tons and 296 under 1600 tons. We have also lost 182 fishing craft, while during the year the arrivals and sailings of merchant vessels of all nationalities at and from the United Kingdom were 260,913. The Admiralty figures do not, however, include Allied or neutral losses. An analysis of the figures in the Manchester Guardian indicates a decline in the losses and the attacks in the second quarter of the year as compared with the first, while comparing the last six months with the first six months there is a big decline-namely, from 680 ships sunk to 438. The total attacks in the first six months were 1132, and in the second six months 646. U-boat activity has, however, been maintained judging by the aggregate of attacks, while if we take the

bigger ships alone the number sunk in the winter quarter was almost exactly the same as the number sunk in the autumn quarter, though in the last three months there has been a substantial decrease in the losses of smaller vessels and a considerable increase of unsuccessful attacks. The submarine campaign is being brought home to us in the serious food restrictions, which are, however, mainly due to world shortage of supplies. The Government have neither moved too soon nor gone too far.

THE inquisitive are inquiring whether, had Colonel Repington remained military critic of the Times and contributed to that ardent Government supporter the identical article A Prosecution that appeared in the Morning Post on February 11 and the Times had dealt with it exactly as did the Morning Post, would there have been a prosecution? It is thought

that in such a case the War Cabinet would have realized that proceedings might be liable to make them ridiculous, all the more as they contained a distinguished journalist, who served his apprenticeship under those fearless critics Mr. John Morley and Mr. W. T. Stead. Ministers might have understood, had the Times been the offender, that to prosecute a leading British journal for discussing matters of common knowledge on the Continent, of which the details had been set forth in the enemy Press, was among those things that could not be done, whatever technical offence might have been committed under some obscure regulation of the Defence of the Realm Act, which in unscrupulous hands could be exploited less for national defence than for selfprotection. It is also suggested that the War Cabinet might have acted otherwise had the Morning Post been so fortunate as to be part of the daily Ministerial claque. On these hypotheses this case was inspired by prejudice and can only increase the discredit which Ministers are continually courting. There was really no serious case presented at Bow Street, and the prosecution was reduced to technicalities. The Morning Post made the most of its opportunity and set forth in detail the information published abroad concerning the decisions of the Supreme War Council at Versailles, about which a gratuitous mystery had been practised at the expense of Parliament and the public. We offer our unreserved congratulations to Mr. Gwynne, the editor, for his courageous action, as also to Colonel Repington for his admirably

« PreviousContinue »