speculative), and eventually only three men were shot, the others receiving varying sentences of penal servitude. The mutiny was attributed to bad and insufficient food, but there were probably other causes, including enforced inactivity, which is always demoralizing, and the submarine campaign, which is anything but "gas and gaiters" for the operators, as we shall learn one day when we are permitted to know of the amazing achievements of that portion of the British race who "go down to the sea in ships and do their business in great waters." Think what this effort has involved on our side, and what it means to the enemy. The losses of German submarines during this year-not quite ten months of the year—are more than twice what they were in the whole of last year. (Mr. Lloyd George, at the Albert Hall, October 22.) ANOTHER excellent sign is the mutual strafing of each other in the public Press of Germany by prominent candidates for the Imperial Chancellorship, round which office the The Strafers vultures began to gather from the moment Dr. Michaelis's days were alleged to be numbered. This tame cat of the Prussian Junkers has turned out to be another Bethmann-Hollweg, only rather more so, because he tries to face even more ways, and therefore exasperates yet more people. Not the least pleasing feature of these internecine squabbles is that Great Britain incidentally comes into her own, as is frequently the lot of honest men when thieves fall out. Von Kuhlmann, the overwily and super-slimy, who is heavily backed by the diplomatic world for the Chancellorship-which is merely the principal Private Secretaryship of the Kaiser--opened the ball by publishing in the Frankfurter Zeitung an incisive review of German foreign policy during the Bülow regime--that distinguished statesman being regarded as one of von Kuhlmann's most dangerous rivals for the coveted office for which Bülow has worked very hard in the war in Italy, Switzerland, and elsewhere, though so far with results inappreciable to the naked eye. The Times (October 20), whose daily column "Through German Eyes" is one of the most valuable contributions to our understanding of German policy, reproduced the substance of this article, which is important, if only because in denouncing Prince Bülow as the arch-culprit the case against us as the chief engineers of the war is discarded. As von Kuhlmann's journalist now calmly tells Germany : VOL LIX 19 One really cannot be satisfied with the almost fatalistic consolation that our enemies, and above all England, spun a net around us with diabolical cunning, and that thus the situation was ultimately produced of which the war was the inevitable consequence. Things are not so simple as that, and it is also no adequate explanation of the present world-catastrophe to say that the shifting of the balance of power among the world peoples, and the resistance of the old Powers, who were in possession, against Germany, who was rising up and forcing her way among them, was bound to result in the bloody conflict. That could be true only if one regards the appeal to arms as absolutely the only method of settling claims and composing differences. Having thus given away what had hitherto been the chief diplomatic asset of the Wilhelmstrasse, whose entire reputation rested on the Machiavellian wickedness of England, the Frankfurter Zeitung, inspired by von Kuhlmann, proceeded to explain that German policy under Prince Bülow "pursued aims which were inconsistent and could not produce definite results." THIS must be cheering reading for the Prince, who has no less an opinion of his diplomatic genius and his diplomatic performances than our Lord Haldane of his! We quote the Times' summary of the semi-official strafe : Bülow's Retort While Germany was increasing her navy, she neither allayed British apprehensions nor secured political insurances on the Continent which would guarantee her position against England. While she was trying to win over Russia, she was offending France; and while she ought to have been trying to win over France, she was engaging in the adventures of Tangier and Algeciras. Moreover, she did not even succeed in binding Italy to the Triple Alliance, and she "permitted" Austria to pursue a policy in the Balkans which threw Serbia into the arms of Russia. The importance of this will be seen when one remembers that it was precisely at this point that the world-war arose." Naturally the Frankfurter Zeitung does not in terms hold either Prince Bülow or Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, his successor, responsible for the Great War, being content to point out that in future their mistakes must be avoided. In other words, it has discovered in the Wilhelmstrasse what has long been obvious to foreigners, viz. that Germany created the present coalition against herself by simultaneously intriguing against every other Power, and now evidently hopes to escape from the consequences of former blunders by working one intrigue at a time. This is von Kuhlmann's forte, and Great Britain is clearly to be his objective. Prince Bülow was not the man to sit down under castigation from a paper which in the days of his former greatness he had so frequently employed to castigate others. He summoned his Press agent, Herr Eugen Zimmermann-not to be confused with ex Secretary Zimmermann who proposed the dismemberment of the United States to Mexico-the political editor of the Lokal Anzeiger, which was all the more interesting as showing that the Industrialists who control that journal are working for a Bülow Chancellorship. The operative passage was reproduced in the excellent column, “Germany Day by Day," which Mr. F. W. Wile, late Berlin Correspondent of the Daily Mail, contributes to that journal. We trust it is read by every member of the Government, because Mr. Wile knows a good deal more about Germany than some Right Honourables. Herr Zimmermann thus passed sentence both on Michaelis the Chancellor and von Kuhlmann the Foreign Secretary, the latter being exposed to the world as an incompetent bungler who could not even separate Great Britain and France. The Wilhelmshaven revelations have shown up the bankruptcy of our internal political regime. Matters are no better with regard to the responsibility for our foreign policy. We have already shown that our political operations in connexion with Belgium [that is, the attempts to ensnare England] have not been exactly successful. Now we have also come to grief in respect of Alsace-Lorraine, which Herr von Kuhlmann, on the Chancellor's direction, precipitated into the political world debate. THE following passage from Bülow's reply to von Kuhlmann is peculiarly pleasing reading on this side of the North Sea, and we Call for the Best doubt not has been duly noted in Paris: English statesmen have declared that, no matter how long the war lasts, England will stand at France's side until her subjugated provinces are freed from the foreign yoke. A separation of England from France in this question has, therefore, not taken place. France, for her part, absolutely rejects the idea of abandoning Alsace-Lorraine as a war aim. The carefully chosen phrases in which Herr Kuhlmann carried out his instructions have, in other words, not succeeded in bringing about a change in either the Belgian or the Alsace-Lorraine questions. Our foes can still laugh at our clumsy operations in connexion with these very important foreign affairs. The Lokal Anzeiger wound up by expressing its agreement with the influential Roman Catholic journal Germania, which had just electrified the Fatherland by declaring that: Just as in this world-war the German army can afford only to be led by its best man, so should no one but our best and most experienced statesman and diplomat [alias Bülow] be at the political wheel. It is for the German Emperor, not for the Reichstag, to decide whether Dr. Michaelis or some one else answers that description. We entirely agree. We have always said so. The Reichstag has very little more say in German affairs than the Putney Parliament in British affairs. It is for the German Emperor alone to decide who shall or shall not be his principal Private Secretary. But it is rather unkind of Germania to suggest that the "invincible German army can afford only to be led by its best man," seeing that the " ever-victorious" Hindenburg is still available, supported and inspired by the incomparable Ludendorff. What does it all mean? Is the popular idol tumbling off his pedestal? That would indeed be debacle. THERE has been one consistent effort throughout the war by those organs which have acquired a prescriptive right to be wrong upon every Anglo-German issue-from the WestBoloism minster Gazette to the Manchester Guardian—to laugh" the Hidden Hand" out of court. It was treated as an emanation from Colney Hatch, and when Lord Milner a year or two ago referred in the House of Lords to the popular suspicion of occult enemy influences in our midst, the usual guffaw went up from the usual Jackasses. Now the Hidden Hand has disclosed itself in the person of a cosmopolitan scoundrel called Bolo, who specialized in corrupting Frenchmen and Americans on behalf of Germany. The suggestion that immaculate England was immune from Boloism is worthy of its authors. The Prime Minister is constrained to publicly recognize it as a force to be reckoned with, as many of us had long suspected. As Mr. Lloyd George put it: "The enemy, beaten on most of the battle-fields, is organizing with deadly care and ingenuity an offensive behind the line. I know what I am talking about. See what has happened in France-they discovered it in time-and look out for Boloism in all its shapes and forms. It is the latest and most formidable weapon in the German armoury." It is indeed formidable, though not recent. Boloism is an old-established business in England. It was euphemistically termed Peaceful Penetration before the war. Mr. Lloyd George bids us beware of it and "look out" for it. With all respect we would give him the same excellent advice. The most dangerous form of Boloism is the super-Bolo, usually born in the Fatherland which has always remained his "spiritual home," but naturalized here by virtue of a scrap of paper" despised by all Boches and Bolos, and enabled through the confiding character of our Responsible Statesmen to become their intimate friend, to learn the secrets of these unsuspecting souls, and to transmit dangerous and deadly information to the enemy. It is the duty of every Minister to revise his circle and discard all Bolos, super-Bolos, and crypto Bolos. It is not much to ask in the fourth year of war. This country should no longer suit the health of any Bolo. The Zeppelins' It has been shrewdly observed that just as England never knows when she is beaten, she never knows when she has won. It certainly looks as though some of us don't know success when we see it. Otherwise there would have been immediate and general rejoicing over the scattering and smashing of the Grand Fleet of Zeppelins which made an abortive attack on England on October 19 and may without exaggeration be described as having met their Waterloo. "Thirteen" was always unlucky, and we are told that this was the number which came and saw, but did anything but conquer our country. The inhabitants of London behaved admirably, though more resolved than ever to bomb German towns, but several enterprising journalists and feather-headed Members of Parliament made a painful exhibition of themselves, because, forsooth, the Grand Fleet came to grief in France rather than in England! What does it matter where the Boche is beaten so long as he is beaten? The Zeppelins could not be dealt with on this side of the Channel owing to atmospheric conditions, which, however, caused them to lose their way, with the result that by daylight the French airmen were able to inflict great losses-at least five being brought down for certain, and probably more. There will be doubtless further air raids upon London, if only because some "rattled " journalists are so hysterical over them, but since the Zeppelins' Waterloo-on which the French are to be heartily congratulated-we are unlikely to be troubled by these monstrous gas-bags. Meanwhile every one wants to know where Ministers really stand on "the bomb for bomb" policy. There is also natural anxiety over the Government's intention to create an Air Minister," lest it mean yet another post for another politician. A Warning WE are obliged to close these pages on a warning note. However successful our soldiers in the field they cannot overcome the submarine. However successful our sailors above water in keeping open the ocean highways, however resourceful, ingenious, and daring in dealing with the sea-assassin, it is doubtful whether they can effectually dispose of an almost |