CHRISTIANITY AND WAR [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR] SIR, —Mr.
de la Bedoyere in your issue of April 21st writes: "There is a great deal of moral indignation in the other camp at the virtual domination by two or three Great Powers of the richest territories and markets of the globe. . ."
I would suggest that his use of the word " richest " indiCates an erroneous view. The territories in question, especially the mandated territories, are not property—no revenue is drawn from them ; quite the contrary, they are not owned by the administering Government, they are administered on a trust. In the mandated territories all nations can trade on equal terms with the "dominator."
The British Government has again and again offered to remedy any proved economic grievance in the matter of raw materials ; the German Government has simply declined to enter into any inquiry for this purpose.
It is certain— (I) that the education, Christianising, and (above all) free- dom under law now extended to African natives would be abolished ;
(a) that Africa would be militarised and strategical war posi- tions created in the Indian or Atlantic Oceans ; were any African colony returned to Germany.
There is plenty of evidence to show that the main motives actuating the German Government in claiming colonies are two: firstly, prestige ; secondly, strategical positions for war. It is impossible to make any considerable European settlement in tropical Africa ; it is impossible to draw any considerable revenue therefrom, except by trade, which is open to Germans, as said above.—I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
r6 Burghley Road, Wimbledon. C. J. EYRES.
Previous page
