NEWS OF HE WEEK.

THE Prime Minister in the House of Commons on Thursday week explained and justified the Peace Treaty. His speech suffered, we think, from being couched in an apologetic tone. Mr. Lloyd George has been misinformed if he supposes that any considerable number of people regard the Treaty as being too sovere. Apart from the small faction of Pacificists and proGoanans, who opposed the war, who were distressed at our victory, and who naturally want their German friends to escape punishment for their crimes, the British nation is wholly unmoved by the contemptible whimpering of the beaten enemy. The general opinion is that the Allies have erred, if at all, on the side of leniency, and that Germany has reason to be grateful because we have not sought to treat her as she meant to treat us.

Mr. Lloyd George said that the terms of Peace were terrible. " Terrible were the deeds which the Peace requites." Yet, if the terms were examined, their justice was obvious. The territories taken from Germany—Alsace-Lorraine, Slesvig, Prussian Poland—had been stolen by her from the countries to which they were now restored. No predominantly German populations had been placed under Polish rule. It would have boon just to require full reparation from Germany ; we had, b wovor, asked only for partial reparation, not including the cost of the war which had been forced upon us. The enforced disarmament of Germany was necessary. It would have been a base betrayal of the natives whom she ruled so ill to give her back her former colonies.

The Prime Minister announced that the ex-Kaiser would be tried before an Allied Court, sitting in London. He had had the prime responsibility for the war, and he would be tried " for the offence he committed in breaking Treaties which he was bound in honour to respect, which he was a party to, and by that means bringing such horrors upon the world." The indictment seems to us unduly narrow ; we comment upon it elsewhere. It will, however, be generally agreed that the Allies are right in their determination to bring home to the " AllHighest," as he was, his personal guilt. Ambitious rulers of the future will be deterred from suddenly attacking their peaceful neighbours by the knowledge that an indignant world will require them to answer in person for their evil deecis. The lesser German malefactors—whose atrocities, Mr. Lloyd George confessed, had been far more shocking than he supposed—could scarcely be tried and punished if their " Supreme War Lord " were allowed to go scot-free. Mr. Lloyd George then dealt with the specious objection that, though the individual terms may be just, their cumulative effect is crushing, and therefore unwise. To leave Germany unpunished, with her territory and industries intact, would have been to put a premium on militarism. The war would have paid her handsomely from a commercial standpoint. On the other hand, to deal with her as she dealt with Poland would have been wrong and foolish. The alternative, adopted by the Allies, was to compel her to make reparation, so as to discourage her from repeating the offence. It was false, Mr. Lloyd George added, to suggest that the German people was opposed to the war. It was enthusiastic for a war from which it expected to reap great profit, and it must endure the consequences of defeat. The Socialists who are now nominally in power were, we may add, ardent militarists so long as they thought Germany certain to win the war.

The guarantees of the Peace were, Mr. Lloyd George said, the disarmament of Germany, the British and American Treaties ensuring help to France if she were attacked without 'Nevemtion, the Allied Armies of Occupation, which could be reduced or withdrawn when Germany showed her good faith, and, lastly, the League of Nations. He described the League as a great and hopeful experiment. " Let us try it "—seriously and in earnest. If one generation passed without a war, the League would have justified itself. Germany could not be admitted at once. " It is very difficult to forget some things." When the Peace settlement had been completed and passions had cooled, the question of admitting Germany to the League could be considered.

In concluding, Mr. Lloyd George spoke with justifiable pride of the great part played by the British Empire in the war. We had enlisted seven million seven hundred thousand men for the Navy and Army, and had raised £9,000,000,000 in taxes and loans. We had sustained three million casualties. Without our Navy and our Mercantile Marine the war would have collapsed in six months. In the last two years the armies of the Empire had the heaviest fighting in France, and ,also bore the whole burden of the war with Turkey. " I think," he said, " that we are entitled to call attention to these things." " It shows what can be achieved by a great people united and inspired by a common purpose." We must not, lie added, " demobilize the spirit of patriotism." National unity WAS urgently required if we were to heal the wounds of war and make all reasonable men content.

The highly important British and American Treaties with France were published last week. As " there is a danger " that the provisions of the Peace Treaty, forbidding Germany to assemble troops or have fortifications within thirty miles of the east bank of the Rhine, " may not at first provide adequate security and protection " for France, Great Britain and America agree separately to support France " in the case of an unprovoked movement of aggression " by Germany. The British Treaty must be sanctioned by Parliament and by the French Chambers. The Treaties must also obtain the approval of the Council of the League of Nations. Each Treaty will remain in force until, " on the application of one of the parties to it," the Council decides that the League of Nations affords France sufficient protection. Our Treaty is, in fact, a defensive Alliance of a very precise kind. France may trust us to observe it in the let* and in the spirit. We shall have to frame our military policy on the basis of the Treaty, which will have the hearty approval of the nation. We could only wish that Italy had been brought into this new and fruitful Alliance.

Those who doubt whether the Germans have any real desire for a Republic, except as a means of deceiving the Allies, may point to the fact that the Assembly at Weimar, in debating on Wednesday the ratification of the Peace Treaty, took exception

only to the clauses requiring the surrender and trial of the exKaiser. The Culprit's younger sons have sought a little notoriety by asking the King to let them take their father's place. They know well, of eourse, that their offer cannot be accepted. They know too that the King is in no way responsible for the trial. The Allied Powers " publicly arraign William II. of Hohenzollern, formerly German Emperor, for a supreme offence against international morality and the sanctity of Treaties." Germany, by signing the Treaty, has agreed that the ex-Kaiser shall be tried by a special Tribunal of Allied Judges. Great Britain Is neither more nor less concerned in the matter than her Allies. But it suits the German official propagandists to pretend that we alone are bent on bringing the criminal to justice.

The German Assembly at the close of Wednesday's sitting ratified the Peace Treaty on a division by 208 votes to 115. Dr, Moller, the Foreign Minister, said that it could not do otherwise, so that the blockade might be raised. The sentimentalists who lament over the hungry people in Germany, and have no tears for the Belgians, the French, the Serbians, and other suffering people, should note Dr. Muller's admission of the potency of our naval and economic weapons. If we had not blockaded Germany, the war might still be raging. But the sentimentalists will never face plain hard facts like this.

The German Government, in order to please the wealthy classes, deliberately refrained from imposing any serious war taxes and financed the war mainly out of loans. They gambled on the chance of victory, since defeat would mean ruin. At the same time the Finance Minister, Herr Helfferich, had the audacity to compare his methods favourably with ours. The result is soon in Herr Erzberger's Budget statement on Tuesday. He told the Assembly that the Empire's revenue must be increased ninefold and that the State must raise twice as much as before. He proposed to effect this financial revolution by making a levy on capital, Death Duties, a tax on the gross profits of business, and so on. We have been saved from such panic-stricken finance by our heavy war taxes.

The remains of that brave merchant sailor, Captain Fryatt, brought home at last from Bruges, were borne in solemn procession to St. Paul's Cathedral on Tuesday, and, after a stately funeral service, were taken to Dovercourt for burial. The dense but silent crowds who gathered to pay their last respects to the dead testified to the profound resentment which English men and women felt, and will always feel when they recall•the coldblooded murder of Captain Fryatt in 1918 by the German Admiral von Schrader, after a travesty of a Court-Martial Captain Fryatt's offence was that, being in command of the unarmed passenger steamer Brussels' in March, 1915, he refused to stop at the order of U33," but bore down upon her, compelled her to submerge, and escaped. If he had stopped, his ship would have been torpedoed and the passengers drowned.

The German naval law, harsh as it is, justified Captain Fryatt's action. Admiral von Sclutdor, however, had him shot, nominally because as a civilian he resisted the U '-boat, but really out of spite because Captain Fryatt's example had encouraged other merchant captains to offer a stout resistance to the enemy submarines. The alleged offence had been committed a year before the murder, and in the interval the enemy had unlawfully sunk many of our merchant ships and drowned their passengers and crews. Captain Fryatt was of course, refused proper legal aid, though it would have been useless in such circumstances. Ho was shot like a dog two hours after the Court-Martial As in the case of Miss Cavell, the enemy were determined to give neutrals no opportunity of intervening on the victim's behalf. We are glad to think that Admiral von Schrader and his accomplices will now be brought to justice. But their cruelty and their incredible meanness of spirit will be long remembered against them and against their people.

The Government on Friday week sustained a defeat in the Rouse of Commons through their own mismanagement. The Women's Emancipation Bill, promoted by the Labour Party, had passed through Committee and was down for the third reading. At this stage the Government, suddenly awaking to the importance of the measure, asked the House to reject it and wait for a wiser Bill which they would introduce in the near future. The House, which is always willing to be led but dislikes official dictation, naturally resented the Government's behaviour, and by 100 votes to 85 passed the Bill. Forty-five supporters of the Coalition, headed by Lord Robert Cecil, voted for the Bill The chief official argument against the Bill was that by extending the franchise to woraenrunder thirty on the same terms as to men the Bill would necessitate a General Election. Such an argument was not likely to carry conviction. There was some truth in the remark of a private Member that the Labour Party would be better employed in securing to women the equal rights in industry which the Trade Unions are inclined to deny -them. But the Bill was passed mainly because the House wanted to assert its independence.

There was a further display of independence on the part of the House when the Transport Bill was being considered on Tuesday. Sir Erie Geddes wanted two Parliamentary Secretaries with salaries. A largo body of Members, irritated at the steady increase in the number of Ministers and their dependants, insisted on an amendment giving the future Transport Minister only one Secretary. Mr. Bonar Law, after vainly pleading that Sir Eric Geddes was not an autocrat, agreed to leave the House free to vote as it pleased, whereupon the amendment was carried by 165 votes to 132. The House of Commons will soon regain its reputation if it continues to exercise its right to criticize and amend Government measures. Nothing did the House so much harm as the now official theory that the House existed merely to.register Government decrees.

Sir Auckland Geddes on Wednesday seems to have astonished the House, and especially the Labour Members, by announcing that the price of coal would be raised from next Wednesday by six shillings a ton. We fail to understand why the announcement should surprise any one, for it was clearly inevitable. As the miners' high wages have been increased by nearly a third, as their nominal working day is reduced from eight to seven hours, and as they work leas hard and less regularly in proportion as their wages rise, the price of coal must go up. The demand for coal is greater than ever and the output is far less. Obviously, then, the ton of coal must be worth more to the eager consumer here and abroad, and he pays a higher price for it. These are elementary truths which the country is bound to face sooner or later, and we are glad for our part that the Government have not tried to disguise thein by any verbal jugglery.

The coal-owners of course gain nothing by the increase in price. Their profit, including trading expenses, will still be fixed at fourteenpence a ton. The miners, on the other hand, will not suffer. They alone can get all the coal which they need at a nominal price, fixed long before the war. While the ordinary working man will have to pay nearly fifty shillings a ton for his small coal ration, the highly paid miner will have as much coal as he can burn for perhaps five shillings a ton. For this reason miners always regard a scarcity of coal with unconcern. The community as a whole, and especially working men and women, is bound to suffer acutely. Our industries were based upon cheap coal Our shipping trade was founded upon a great export of coal If we cannot send coal overseas, bringing back foodstuffs in its place, our food will cost us more. If our manufacturers, hampered by the cost of coal, cannot compete in the world markets with their rivals, then our old industrial supremacy must go. The outlook is very grave indeed. If Government meddling in the coal industry has led to such untoward results, what would be the effect of complete State control ?

An American correspondent, quoted by Sir Edward Carson in Monday's Morning Post, said that the Senate's recent vote of sympathy with Slim Fein was a political move, designed mainly to express the Senate's dislike of the League of Nations Covenant. It was well known, he said, that Sinn Fein was promoted by the Roman Catholic Church in its ceaseless attempt to gain temporal power. Americans, who valued their religious freedom, had no liking for this priest-ridden agitation. Roman Catholics formed only fifteen per cent. of the population of the United States ; a bare tenth of them were of Irish birth. America was not likely to concern herself with the desire of this insignificant Irish section to interfere in the affairs of the country which they had renounced on becoming American citizens. Sir Edward Carson's correspondent remarked in conclusion that " the avere.gf American has no interest in meddling with European affairs," and that " the average European has no interest in meddling with purely American affairs." If the Senate had not thought, or affected to think, that the League of Nations would interfere with the Monroe Doctrine, it would not hays taken up the ease of Sinn Fein to show us how awkward another country's interference in our politics might be.

We are gjad to learn that the General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church, held at St. Louis a few weeks ago, passed a strong resolution on behalf of the Ulster Presbyterians and other Protestants. The Assembly took note of the fact that the Roman Catholic hierarchy was conducting a public propaganda in America on behalf of the Irish Republicans, and that Ulster protested against Sinn Fein rule, which would endanger its liberties and its religion. If, said the Assembly, Congress favoured Sinn Fein on the ground of " self-determination," it should accord equal consideration for the same reason to Ulster. The American Presbyterians recalled the great services rendered by Ulstermen—not by Irishmen from the South and West—to the Colonies in their struggle with George III. The General Assembly expressed its sympathy with " our fellow-Presbyterians in Ireland, from whose ancestry came the large majority of that portion from Irish citizenry which has so much to do with the forwarding of the American Republic on its broad basis of religious and political liberty."

Sir Horace Plunkett has formed an " Irish Dominion League," seemingly with the hope of winning over the less irrational Sinn Feiners. The League apparently admits the " right" of the Irish to " self-determine " themselves out of the British Empire—in plain words, to seceder-but suggests that a Dominion has no• such " right." The Sinn Feiners, who are at least more frank, have hastened to point out that, if we granted Ireland the status of a Dominion, the first act of the Sinn Fein majority would be to declare an Irish Republic. The Irish Dominion League thinks that that would have " disadvantages " for Ireland. Let us say plainly once morn that Great Britain can never permit the establishment of an Irish Republic. That solution is ruled out. We gather that the League would compel Ulster, with or without paper safeguards, to enter an Irish Dominion. As the British people will never agree to the coercion of Ulster, that solution also is impossible. Sir Horace Plunkett has really nothing new to contribute towards the eternal debate. Until the Irish Nationalists come to a better mind, there is nothing now to be said.

Many of our readers will receive this paper before the lists for the Victory Loan are closed. If they have not yet subscribed, or if, on further consideration, they feel that they can increase their subscriptions, wo trust that they will do so. The State will never again offer so good an investment in our time ; the Bonds, backed by the unimpeachable security of the British Government, are certain to rise in value when normal conditions of peace return. Moreover, the success of the Loan will in itself tend to hasten the revival of industry by restoring order in our finances. Patriotism does not always accord with self-interest. In the case of the Victory Loan the two motives unite to induce every man or woman to invest the largest possible amount, so that the Chancellor of the Exchequer may be freed from anxiety.

The Joint Committee of the two Houses which inquired into the much-abused motor depot at Slough published their Report on Tuesday. As we expected, the Report entirely fails to justify the furious agitation worked up by the Northcliffe Press. The Committee commend the planning of the motor depot as a war measure, while regretting that the War Office obstructed it for many months in 1917 and 1918. The Committee think that Lord Iriverforth, in going on with the scheme after the Armistice, formed too sanguine an estimate of the profits to be made by repairing the Government's motor-cars and lorries in a Government depot which may cost more than £1,750,000 plus fifteen per cent. The work of repair, they say, will not take more than three years. They admit, however, that the depot as it stands could be sold at a profit, and that,, as various Departments will require an increasing number of motors, it may be desirable for the Ministry of Supply to have a central depot where such motors can be repaired. Lord Inverforth, unlike the ordinary official, seems• to have taken a long view. We are inclined to think that his foresight will be justified hereafter.

A Royal Commission on Agriculture has been appointed " to inquire into the economic prospects of the agricultural industry in Great Britain, with special reference to the adjustment of a balance between the prices of agricultural commodities, the costs of production, the remuneration of labour and hours of employment." Sir William Peat, the chartered accountant,

is the Chairman. Of the twenty-two members, eight are landowners or farmers, while eight represent the agricultural labourers. The Commission has a most important and most difficult task. It will presumably be free to consider, in relation to prices, the future fiscal policy of the country. For the time being, there is no likelihood of a serious fall in the price of imported wheat. But if wo were able onoe more to import wheat at thirty shillings a quarter or less, it is clear that the British farmer, paying wages on the new scale, could not attempt to grow 00411. The question will have to be faced by the Commission and by the country.

The Government, according to the Times, have decided to appoint Royal Commissions to report on the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, with the approval of the University authorities, who have nothing to conceal, and deserve that fuller recognition of their work which the Commissions will doubtless give. Some Labour politicians, it seems, approached Mr. Fisher on Wednesday and proposed to put Oxford and Cambridge under the control of the bureaucracy dear to Mr. Sidney Webb. They made it a complaint that Oxford and Cambridge were closed to clever men who were poor. We must say at once that that is absolutely untrue. The old Universities open their doors wide to talent, and the poor man, if be has brains, is welcomed and helped. Nowhere is Oxford more greatly admired and rjaspected, as we have pointed out lately, than in America, the most democratic country in the world.

The great British airship ` R34,' which left her shed near North Berwick early on Wednesday week, landed safely on Long Island last Sunday afternoon. She had crossed the Atlantic on a course of 3,180 sea miles in one hundred and eight hours. The airship was twice deflected from her course over Newfoundland and Nova Scotia by severe thunderstorms, which she had to circumnavigate. Her engines thus consumed more fuel than was thought to be necessary ; when she descended, she had not an hour's supply of petrol remaining. Neverthe

less, the ` ' accomplished the first Transatlantic airship flight without a mishap. The only person on board who suffered any ill effects was a stowaway who hid himself among the gasbags. Our Air Force may be proud of the airship and its expert navigators, who set out on their return journey at midnight on Wednesday. It is, however, clear from General Maitland's log that the dangers of the voyage had been considerably underestimated. Not until the weather conditions prevailing over the Atlantic have been thoroughly investigated will airships be able to compete with the liners. A regular aerial ferry to New York is a dream of the future.

The translation which we give in another column of the passage in which in 1881 Renan, with prophetic insight, delineated the essential Prussian and the spirit of Frightfulness, is well worth consideration in view of the trial of the ex-Kaiser. The first thought that rises to the mind on reading it is : What a warning of coming tragedy ! How was it that oven in the case of a man whose voice carried as far as Renan's did nobody attended—nobody realized what the rise of German power might mean, or must mean, and what were the precautions necessary to take against It ? It is obvious that if forty years ago we had understood what might happen, it could not have happened. The answer, we think, is that the French wore the beaten side. The world worships, or at any rate always listens to, the successful side, to the victor. Therefore the warnings of men like Renan, based upon what had happened in France in the " seventies," fell on unheeding ears. If Frightfulness succeeds, none dare call it Frightfulness.

And now comes the point of our contention. We have got to publish, for all the world to see, the results of, and the spirit of, Prussian Frightfulness. But one of the best ways, perhaps the best of all, for doing this is the solemn record of a criminal trial. It is idle to say that it shows want of magnanimity, or that it is like kicking a man when he is down, for the victors to hold up his misdeeds before the eyes of the workl. We must never forgot, as we have just said, that it is only those who are successful who can do this. We dare not miss this opportunity of putting the brand of Cain upon the brow of Prussianism. The coming generation must know and feat the Nemesis of Cruelty and Hate, of Blood-Lust and the Pitiless• ness of a deified Materialism.