exercise of absolute power in face of a Parliament of poltroons. And,
lastly, I will abandon my old argument that the discussion of peace
terms might shorten the war, without any risk of prolonging it. And
still I very strongly hold that peace terms ought to be discussed.

It appears to me that there is a desire--I will not say a conspiracy--on
the part of the Government to bring this war to an end in the same
manner as it will be brought to an end in Germany--that is to say,
autocratically, without either the knowledge or the consent of the
nation. The projected scheme, I imagine, is to sit tight and quiet, and
in due course inform the nation of a fact accomplished. It can be done,
and I think it will be done, unless the House of Commons administers to
itself a tonic and acquires courage. Already colonial statesmen have
been politely but firmly informed that they are not wanted in England
this year! The specious excuse for keeping the nation in the dark is
that we are allied to Russia, where the people are never under any
circumstances consulted, and to France, where for the duration of the
war the Government is as absolute in spirit and in conduct, as that of
Russia; and that we must not pain those allied Governments by any
exhibition of democracy in being. Secrecy and a complete autocratic
control of the people are the watchwords of the allied Governments, and
therefore they must be the watchwords of our Government.

This is very convenient for British autocrats, but the argument is not
convincing. The surrender of ideals ought not to be so one-sided. We do
not dream of suggesting to the Russian and the French Governments how
they ought to conduct themselves toward their peoples; and similarly we
should not allow them to influence the relations between our Government
and ourselves.