to Germany as " still a monarchy, albeit without a

monarch," or " a republic without republicans." I wish now to show how much justification there is for considering her in this light.

Berlin is not Germany, and there are numberless signs that Republicanism has not entered into the heart of the German people ; in short, that it sits upon them as ill as a morning coat and a silk hat on a Swiss peasant. Quite recently I had a long epistle from Dr. Dryander, who still signs himself

" Hofprediger " ; that is, he is a Court preacher without a Court.

And should any one attend the country churches in Germany on a Sunday, ho will still hear prayers offered up for the Kaiser and the Royal family. The numerous country newspapers, which the German people read, have not changed their policy, nor has a single important paper, so far as I know, changed its editor. Journals such as the Frankfurter Zeitung or the Berliner Tageblatt are no doubt preaching democracy, but they are little more than voices in the wilderness ; and as for the Vorwcirts, it has always been what it still is—a Socialist organ, although now it is certainly somewhat more outspoken. But we always come back to Jeremiah's question : "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots ? "

Tho Germans, in short, are not a Republican people. Many

excellent persons in Great Britain doubtless believe that now they are Republican in sentiment, and that the Hohenzollerns in their precipitate flight took devotion to monarchical govern- ment with them. Devotion to the House of Hohenzollern— yes, that there is every reason to think they did take, but that is all. There is no proof, or at any rate here at the listening-post of Europe it is impossible to glean any satisfactory sign, that Germany has ceased to be the monarchical country that she was.

It is not long since I was discussing this very question with

Herr von Gerlach, editor of that well-known periodical Die Well am Montag. He frankly admitted that, by his abdication and somewhat ignominious taking to his heels, William Hohenzollern had lost much sympathy, and that the people had no particular liking for the ex-Crown Prince either. But to assert that the people had therefore become Republican, he said, was quite another matter ; and to infer that because they do not care for a, particular individual to reign over them, therefore they are Republicans, is utterly illogical. What few true Republicans there are in Gee many Herr von Gerlach considers to be without influence. A few Germans are Republicans from motives of ambition ; and so long as they think a Republican wind is blowing they will trim their saile to it, but no longer. In reality, it is very difficult to generalize about what the mass of Germans are thinking at present. They are still to a great extent " flabbergasted." Some of them aro undoubtedly as Pan-Germanist and as militarist as ever. Let any one who wishes for proof of this read the Pan-Germanist Press, and particularly the small country papers, which the foreign correspondents in Berlin seem to ignore. A great many people, however, are not really Pan-Germanist, or militarist, or Republican, or anything else, but are ready to join any party which will give them bread, and enough of it, and protect them against civil war. Then there are a certain number of desperadoes, Bolsheviks, Communists, and others, who would be ready to bring about a world-wide revolution, or see Germany declare herself bankrupt, if only by doing so she might be relieved from her Treaty obligations. A mere remnant are what in England wo would call Republican ; that is, are in favour of democratic government. Indeed, we could not expect this to be otherwise. It is impossible, at one swoop, to do away with all the effects of a nation's upbringing and education.

Again, monarchy in the minds of Germans is not associated

with bad times and misery, but with good times, times of plenty and prosperity when all went well ; while since its abolition all has gone ill with Germany. Even now it is the Generals of the former monarchy who have probably most real influence ; and they, of course, make no attempt to conceal that they are monarchists. They appear still not to confess Germany's defeat, for they continue breathing out threatening; and slaughters against their conquerors. An ugly characteristic) of the Germans to-day is their constant exhibition of a sentiment for which wo have no single word—Schadenfreude, malignant joy in the misfortunes of others. They are miserable them- selves, and nothing pleases them better than to see other*

wretched—the more wretched the merrier ; and it shall not be their fault if all the world be not made wretched. Again, not a word is ever said to the German people about any misdeeds of the German Army, whereas the slightest peccadillo of the Entente troops in Germany is trumpeted abroad always and everywhere, although, as the National Zeitung, of Basel, pointed out recently, " the behaviour of the Entente armies of occupation is incomparably more humane and honourable, even if there should be a, little harshness now and again." Apparently Germany has absolutely forgotten how she made Belgium and France to suffer, for I have before me Siraplicissimus of September 23rd, containing a cartoon about the French in occupied territory, showing the German Prometheus bound to the rocks, with the French cock tearing out his liver.

A straw shows which way the wind blows, but perhaps it is not merely a straw that the German Minister of War, Noske, should this summer have appeared at great social events, such as the Berlin " Derby," in the Imperial box, with a crowd of spur-clanking officers and Junkers about him. And to show how incorrigible the Germans are I may mention a fifty-eight- page pamphlet just published in Berlin " by Order of the Ministry of War and the Commander-in-Chief of the Army" entitled German Methods of Warfare and International Law. The Preface to this is instructive :-

" Our enemies," it says, " endeavour to justify the harshness of the peace conditions not only by declaring Germany guilty of causing the war to break out, but also-of having waged it in a manner inhuman and contrary to law. They have systemati- cally set to work to cause the whole world to adopt these views, and it is unfortunately a fact that many people, and not foreigners alone, are inclining to do so. In particular, they believe that our military methods, and the measures of the authorities in enemy-occupied territory, were frequently unnecessarily harsh, and purposely infringed the rules of international law and the precepts of humanity. If these false notions be not everywhere opposed, there will be a danger that, in course of time, they may obscure historical truth, undermine the self-respect of the Germans, ruin the good name of our valiant Army, and also poison the minds of foreigners against the German people. These wrong ideas, moreover, have had an immense deal to do with aggravating the sufferings of the war, and were responsible for converting the peace negotiations into a judicial murder. During the war there were neither workers enough nor time enough systematically to contradict every foolish legend about our methods of warfare."

It is then explained that it was often necessary to keep military measures secret, and that consequently much misapprehension about them exists, even in Germany. The German General Staff has issued a number of publications to enlighten the public, but these are too voluminous to be read by every one. Hence, we are told, the need for the present pamphlet, " at a time when the masses are handed over defenceless to enemy propaganda " :— " In view of what is contained in this publication, it may be justly claimed that it is untrue to assert that our military measures and methods of warfare were unnecessarily cruel, and that we plundered occupied territory in defiance of international law, or needlessly devastated it.. On the contrary, from the standpoint alike of international law and of morality, our official measures have much less need to fear an impartial Court of Justice than, for instance, our enemies' blockade measures, their behaviour in German territory at present under occupation, or their treatment of German prisoners of war and German residents abroad. Our measures were based partly on absolute military necessity, partly on an endeavour to provide our Army with everything needful in war time, as well as was possible while duly observing the regulations of the Hague Convention concerning Land Warfare."

As regards German measures in occupied territory, the writers of this unbelievable Preface remark that those whose business it was to execute them often did so unwillingly, and that the German military treated the population in occupied territory " with such leniency as to be often reproached with being kinder to foreigners than to their own people." I will give only one instance of the arguments of this pamphlet— about the use of asphyxiating gases. The German General Staff allege that gas has been used in warfare for thousands of years past ; that even in the Peloponnesian Ware the Spartans tried to smoke their enemy out ; that the ancients used to burn sulphur and arsenic with pitch and tar when the wind blew in the direction of their foe; and that "man" used to construct projectiles filled with chemicals, which were thrown at the enemy and which made it impossible for him to breathe. It is not stated when " man " did this, or what sort of chemicals filled the projectiles. Finally, Admiral Lord Dundonald is said to have tried to smoke out his enemy at the taking of SebastopoL What is the meaning of such a pamphlet appearing just now, with the imprimatur of the German General Staff ? An explanation which I believe is correct, and which was given me by a well-informed Swiss in close touch with the Germans, is as follows :— " The Entente Governments are demanding that certain high German officers shall be brought before a Court on a charge of inhuman methods of waging war. These officers are now trying to induce the German public to refuse to hand them over. A military dictatorship will soon be established in Germany, and the present Government be overthrown, and of course the military want to have the public behind them. Therefore it is that they are so busy whitewashing themselves now before their own people."

The monarchists and the anti-revolutionaries, in other words, the militarists in Germany, are far more active than seems usually realized, and General Hoffmann, of Brest-Litovsk and table-thumping fame, is freely mentioned as the future dictator. What about General von Stein's recent lucubrations in the Sudden-lecke Monatshefte, referring to democracy as an " antiquated thing," whose colours will not long fly over Germany, but soon be replaced by that " Imperial standard which flew above her in her fighting and victorious days " ? And what about Rittmeister Mass, who was not afraid publicly to declare that, as the Peace Treaty forces Germany to reduce her Army to 100,000 men, the Germans have undertaken to form civic guards, who are being paid not by the Government but by wealthy private citizens ? No one imagines that these German anti-revolutionaries are longing to bring back the ex-Kaiser or ex-Crown Prince ; but from a trustworthy source I learn that it is one of the Crown Prince's eons whom they will attempt to place on the throne, and of course establish a regency over Germany, with General Hoffmann to thump upon the Ministerial tables.

In any case, what is the meaning of the Pan-Germanists being so active ? Why are all the officials giving the Republic the coldest of cold shoulders ? Why are seals, coats of arms, uniforms, stamps, and all manner of Kaiserlich and K5niglich flummery not merely being brought forth again and gaily sported, but ordered anew—any quantity, it would appear ? What are such words as Kaiserlich and Koniglich, doing in a Republic at all ? The Junkers declare that the monarchy which they want is not the old monarchy, but a Constitutional form of government such as we have in England, and add that they do not see how the Entente can reasonably object to this. The ex-Raiser, it may be remembered, in his typewritten deed of abdication, dated from Amerongen, November 28th, 1918, renounced all rights to the crown of Prussia and the German Imperial- crown for himself alone, but not for his descendants ; and the German monarchists argue that if they choose a grand- child of his to be a Constitutional monarch, they are quite