[[3]] Mr. Haldane reduced the Army by nine battalions (i.e. 9000 men) in 1906. He stated that he had no use for them. This meant a great deal more, when the reserve-making power is taken into consideration.... "The Regular Army ... has been reduced by over 30,000 men; not only a present, but a serious prospective loss."—Lord Roberts in the House of Lords, April 3, 1913.
[[4]] Even four years later we find Sir Wilfrid Laurier wedded to the belief that the German Emperor was one of the great men of the present age; wonderfully endowed by intellect, character, and moral fibre; his potent influence was always directed towards peace.—Canadian House of Commons Debates, February 27, 1913, 4364. The whole of this speech (4357-4364) in opposition to Mr. Borden's Naval Forces Bill is interesting reading, as is also a later speech, April 7, 1913, on the same theme (7398-7411).
[[5]] How Britain Strove for Peace, by Sir Edward Cook: especially pp. 18-35; also Why Britain is at War, by the same author. These two pamphlets are understood to be a semi-official statement authorised by the British Government.
[[6]] Lord Haldane has explained German conduct in the present war by a sudden change of spirit, such as once befell a collie dog which owned him as master, and which after a blameless early career, was possessed by a fit of depravity in middle life and took to worrying sheep. Thus in a single metaphor he extenuates the German offence and excuses his own blindness!
[[7]] "Lord Haldane: What he did to thwart Germany." Pamphlet published by the Daily Chronicle.
[[8]] At Cardiff, October 2, 1914.
[[9]] If this were really so, it is remarkable that Germany has not published these opiate documents, which lulled her vigilance and were the cause of her undoing. In the New York Evening Post (February 15, 1915) there is a letter signed 'Historicus' in which the German version of the facts is not seriously questioned, although a wholly different inference is drawn: "This extremely conciliatory attitude of England is another proof of the pacific character of her foreign policy. But, unfortunately, German political thought regards force as the sole controlling factor in international relations, and cannot conceive of concessions voluntarily made in answer to claims of a more or less equitable nature. To the German mind such actions are infallible indications of weakness and decadence. Apparently Grey's attitude towards German claims in Turkey and Africa was so interpreted, and the conclusion was rashly reached that England could be ignored in the impending world-war."
[[10]] "The time has now come to state with a clearness which cannot be mistaken that Sir Edward Grey as Foreign Secretary is impossible."—Daily News, January 10, 1912. The Daily News was not a lonely voice speaking in the wilderness. Similar threats have been levelled against Mr. Churchill.
[[11]] It has been stated on good authority, that Mr. McKenna upheld the national interests with equal firmness, and against equal, if not greater opposition, while he was at the Admiralty.
[[12]] A large section of the Liberal party watched with jealous anxiety our growing intimacy with France. In 1913, however, they discovered in it certain consolations in the withdrawal of our ships of war from the Mediterranean; and they founded upon this a demand for the curtailing of our own naval estimates. France according to this arrangement was to look after British interests in the Mediterranean, Britain presumably was to defend French interests in the Bay of Biscay and the Channel. When, however, the war-cloud was banking up in July 1914, these very people who had been most pleased with our withdrawal from the Mediterranean, were those who urged most strongly that we should now repudiate our liabilities under the arrangement.