from the war-aims and ruthless actions of German statesmen and armies. John Morley, in his Diary of July 9, 1891, once wrote of him, during a visit to England, that there was "energy, rapidity, restlessness in every movement, from his short, quick inclinations of the head to the planting of the foot. But I should be disposed strongly to doubt whether it is all sound, steady, and the result of a rightly co-ordinated organization." Years passed on and whether for good or ill the Kaiser's character hardened and his ambitions and convictions became interchangeable.

The current denunciation of him and his policy in the worldpress outside of German countries, had in 1914-17 a touch of warfury about it; but there could be no doubt that he bore an awful burden of responsibility, personally and historically, in his initiation of the War and in its conduct at the hands of his Generals and soldiers. That his personality was a powerful one appears clear. No monarch who could carry his people and allied nations into such a conflict and hold them there in the teeth of 800 and then of 1,400 millions of other peoples during four years of terrific struggle, could be honestly said to lack strength of will and capacity. Like Napoleon, he had the ambition and faculty of ruling; unlike Napoleon he had to leave much, though not all, of the military leadership to others. His people, in the main, believed in him during this period and through 1917-whatever changes defeat or starvation might later on create, or whatever of increased prestige victory or partial success might evolve.

Meanwhile he bestrode the continent like a Colossus and his armies went hither and thither at will, while hosts of cleverlyorganized agents and spies and political workers pulled the strings in every enemy country. German Socialism in all its millions, though restless, still lay at his feet; conflicting and antagonistic races and interests in Austria-Hungary, the Balkans and Turkey obeyed his war-behests; political critics at home still whispered in private or withdrew their public opposition to his internal policy. To a considerable degree he still embodied in himself the will and ambition and character of his people; the Divine right of rule and action, which he, no doubt, believed in as honestly as any monarch of the distant past, was capable of continued exercise only because of this fact.

His order to the Army and Navy at the beginning of 1917, when the Peace proposals of that time collapsed, was as typical of this arrogant piety and war enthusiasm as was the autocracy of many old-time rulers in other applications and other conditions: "Our enemies refused my offer. Their hunger for power desires Germany's destruction. The War will be continued. Before God and humanity I declare that on the Government of our enemies alone falls the heavy responsibility for all further terrible sacrifices from which I wished to save you. With justified indignation at our enemies' arrogant crime and with determination to defend our holiest possessions and secure for the Fatherland a happy future, you will become as steel. Our enemies did not want the understanding offered by me. With God's help our arms will enforce it.-Wilhelm,

I.R."

His ensuing Proclamation (published Jan. 14) was also significant of "the will to power," which Treitschke urged and the Prussian people had made a world formula:

Our glorious victories and our iron strength of will, with which our fighting people at the Front and at home have borne all hardships and distress guarantee that also in the future our beloved Fatherland has nothing to fear. Burning indignation and holy wrath will redouble the strength of every German man and woman, whether it is devoted to fighting, to work or to suffering. We are ready for all sacrifices. The God who planted His glorious spirit of freedom in the hearts of our brave peoples will also give us and our loyal Allies, tested in battle, the full victory over all the enemy lust for power and rage for destruction.-Wilhelm, I.R.

To understand the Kaiser and his government, the diplomatic arguments of Germany and the attitude of its people, their extraordinary national conceptions of World-morality must always be remembered. There was no change apparent in 1917. Just as Bethmann-Hollweg and Von Jagow, and of course the Kaiser, saw no crime in smashing the neutrality of Belgium, so on Jan. 11, 1917, a Note handed to the neutral Powers from the German Government said: "Twice the Imperial Government declared to the Belgian Government that it was not entering Belgium as an enemy, and entreated it to save the country from the horrors of war. In this case it offered Belgium a guarantee for the full integrity and independence of the Kingdom and to pay for all the damage which might be caused by German troops marching through the country. The Belgian Government refused the repeated offer of the Imperial Government. On it, and on those Powers who induced it to take up this attitude, falls the responsibility for the fate which befell Belgium." As a matter of history Frederick the Great had acquired Silesia and its basis of industrial strength just as Wilhelm I took Alsace-Lorraine and its basis for the iron and steel and armament greatness of modern Germany, or as Wilhelm II took Belgium with a view to crushing France and reaching England. These incidents, or Schleswig-Holstein and the Kiel Canal, Kiao-Chau and defiance to Japan and China, the Delcassé affair and the taking of French-African territory, were stages in a process of acquisition which, in 1914-17, included the great French mining districts of Briey and Longwy, Belgium, Poland, Courland, Lithuania, Esthonia, Roumania, etc. National and military necessity to the German mind demanded these territories and therefore they must be taken!

The people were convinced of the absolute superiority of the Germans over all other races and the difference between their conception along this line and that of American spread-eaglism or British conceit lay in a deliberate education by their masters to feel that the only way in which this sentiment could be embodied and practiced was in conquest by force as a combined religious and racial duty. The system of thought, faith, policy, practice, and the methods of war which resulted, were foreshadowed* in countless

*A most interesting work in this connection is William Archer's Gems of German Thought. See also the German Sections of The Canadian Annual Review for 1914, 1915, 1916.

writings and speeches and books-700 books a year on War alone were issued before 1914 or in defence of the War after 1914. Universities, schools, pulpits of all denominations, poems, songs, public gatherings, farm leagues, industrial leagues, colonial societies, all poured into the public mind the idea, which had slowly crystallized into action, that everything was at the service of the State, that everything should serve national ends. A few quotations from German books may be put on record here:

1. Pure Germanism (1893) by Freidrich Lrange: Who knows whether we Germans are not the rod predestined for the chastening of these degeneracies; who knows whether we may not again, like our fathers in dim antiquity, have to gird on our swords and go forth to seek dwelling-places for our increase!

2. Thoughts on the World-War, by Prof. Ernst Haeckel: One single highly-cultured German warrior, of those who are, alas, falling in thousands, represents a higher intellectual and moral life-value than hundreds of the raw children of nature whom England and France, Russia and Italy, oppose to them.

3. The True Causes of the World-War, by Karl A. Kuhn: Must Kultur rear its domes over mountains of corpses, oceans of tears, and the death-rattle of the conquered? Yes, it must. The might of the conqueror is the highest law of

morality, before which the conquered must bow.

4. The Real England, by Edmund V. Heyking: England is our worst enemy, and we will fight her till we have overthrown her. So may it please our Great Ally, Who stands behind the German battalions, behind our ships and U-boats, and behind our blessed 'militarism.'

5. War Devotions, by Pastor J. Rump: Verily the Bible is our book.

It was given and assigned to us, and we read in it the original text of our destiny, which proclaims to mankind salvation or disaster-according as we will it.

6. Politicus (1899) by H. Von Treitschke: Every sovereign State has the undoubted right to declare war at its pleasure, and is consequently entitled to repudiate its treaties.

7. World-Germany, by F. Philippi: Formerly German thought was shut up in her corner, but now the world shall have its coat cut according to German measure, and as far as our swords flash and German blood flows, the circle of the earth shall come under the tutelage of German activity.

8. War (1906) by Karl Wagner: War is the basis of all Kultur, of all morality. War is the source of all good growth. Without war the development of nations is impossible.

9. A Genealogy of Morals, by Freidrich Nietzsche: Deep in the nature of all these noble races there lurks unmistakably the beast of prey, the blond beast, lustfully roving in search of booty and victory.

A part of this curious world of thought, more or less a product of it, was the Kaiser, his family, his ministers, his Generals. At times the Kaiser could show democratic wisdom as well as autocratic assurance and of such a character was his Order of Apr. 8, 1917, addressed to the Imperial Chancellor, who was, also, First Minister in Prussia. In it he observed that "in the endeavour, while strictly holding the just balance between the people and the Monarchy, to serve the welfare of the whole, I am resolved to begin building up our internal political, economic and social life as soon as the war situation allows." Preparations, therefore, must be made to meet the changed conditions of the future, and as to this he added: "Reform of the Prussian Diet and the liberation of our entire inner political life, especially, are dearest to my heart." For the Lower House there was to be "direct and secret election of Deputies"; and for the Upper one "more extensive and proportionate representation." Much discussion followed but the pro

posals were not carried out during this year. So, also, with a policy suggested by the Constitutional Committee of the Imperial Reichstag, which urged that the Chancellor and Ministers of War and Marine should be responsible to that Chamber and that the Kaiser's ordinances should be countersigned by the Chancellor for the Reichstag.

Meantime all the important threads of war and government, transportation, food supplies, industry, agriculture and foreign relations were by now more or less controlled by Marshal Von Hindenburg and Marshal Von Ludendorff-the latter the real Kitchener of Germany in matters of military organization. Many subordinates, many Ministers, varied political leaders, there were, but around and above them all were the war needs and policy guided by these two men under the Kaiser, and embodied in an Imperial rescript to the Army and Navy on Aug. 1: "We shall fight for our existence in the future with firm resolution and unfailing courage. As our problems multiply so does our strength increase. We are invincible. We shall be victorious. The Lord God will be with us.-Wilhelm, I & R." To the people, on this anniversary, was issued a proclamation which reviewed "this righteous war of defence" and concluded with a significant clause: "Our people may rest assured that German blood and German zeal are not being gambled with for an empty shadow of ambition or schemes of conquest and subjugation but in defence of a strong free empire in which our children may live in security." On Aug. 22 His Majesty, in addressing troops in Flanders, said:

It is in God's hands when, in His wisdom, He will give us victory. All Germans have realized who is the instigator of this war, and who is the chief enemy-England. Everyone knows England is our most spiteful adversary. She spreads the hatred of Germany over the whole world, filling her Allies with hatred and eagerness to fight. Thus everyone at home knows what you know still better, that England is particularly the enemy to be struck down, however difficult it may be.

The Kaiser's belief in, or misuse of, God's name was as earnest and pronounced as with Puritan leaders of old. A favourite form was indicated in the despatch to Prince Leopold after the conquest of Riga: "Far-seeing leadership and steel-hard will to victory guaranteed this fine success. Onward with God"! At this time the publication of Treaties and correspondence between the Czar and other European rulers created wide comment and aroused a storm of criticism in the Allied press against the Kaiser. It was a very natural condition but it is a little difficult to see any particular wickedness in the diplomatic efforts of the Kaiser to break up a growing entente amongst those whom he considered his rivals and perhaps really believed to be his enemies. Moreover, an agreement between two autocrats, heads of two great neighbouring nations, was not in itself improper or unnatural and not by any means the first of the kind which England had been compelled to meet. That Britain and France won out in the end was creditable to the peaceaims of the Czar; it did not particularly reflect upon the Kaiser himself. The Czar even stated in his correspondence (Aug. 4, 1906) that: "The maintenance of friendly relations between Germany

and England is an absolute necessity for the world." On Dec. 22, 1917, the Kaiser made a speech to his Second Army, which dealt with the battles of the year on the Western front in characteristic terms:

The year of 1917, with its great battles, has proved that the German people has in the Lord of Creation above an unconditional and avowed Ally on whom it can absolutely rely. Without Him all would have been in vain. We do not know what is still in store for us, but you have seen how, in this last of the four years of war, God's hand has visibly prevailed. If the enemy does not want peace, then we must bring peace to the world by battering in with the iron fist and shining sword the doors of those who will not have peace.

Meanwhile the German leaders had talked and acted in a similar strain. The Submarine decision of January and the United States break of February created difficulties for these Ministers at home and abroad. Herr Von Bethmann-Hollweg, as Imperial Chancellor, used characteristic German language in the Reichstag on Jan. 31: "I always proceeded from the standpoint of whether an unrestricted U-boat war will bring us nearer to a victorious peace or not. Every means, I said in March, that is calculated to shorten the War is the humanest policy to follow. When the most ruthless methods are considered as the best calculated to lead us to victory, and to a swift victory, I said at that time, that they must be employed." Then followed the usual curious Divine appeal: "Success lies in a higher hand, but as regards all that human strength can do to enforce success for the Fatherland, you may be assured that nothing has been neglected." In an interview Count Von Hertling, Bavarian Prime Minister (Feb. 20) declared that "the War draws nearer its termination, but it must be fought to the bitter end"; while the Kaiser on the 1st of that month had issued a naval order which stated that: "In this work the Submarine will stand in the first rank. I expect that this weapon, technically developed with wise foresight at our admirable yards, in co-operation with all our other naval fighting weapons and supported by the spirit which, during the whole course of the War, has enabled us to perform brilliant deeds, will break our enemy's war-will."

As the months passed on Peace discussions became more frequent and were the apparent cause of the Chancellor's retirement. The latter would not accede to the Socialist demand for a formula of no annexations or indemnities and on May 15 told the Reichstag that: "Time is on our side. With full confidence we can trust that we are approaching a satisfactory end. Then the time will come when we can negotiate with our enemies about our war aims, regarding which I am in full harmony with the Supreme Army command. Ledebour, Haase, Schiedemann and other Socialist leaders, in vain demanded specific terms for Peace. There followed the crisis of July and the Government's desertion by Mathias Erzberger of Bavaria, leader of the Clericals or Catholic Centre of the PanGerman party. His policy was, apparently, to promote a Reichstag demonstration with the object of showing that Germany was not the servant of a Prussian military caste: to link the Government with the Reichstag by forming a sort of Coalition Ministry which,