3i

pudiation of opinions held and openly proclaimed in times of peace, is well illustrated by the volte-face of an English colonial writer, the missionary John II. Harris. In 1917 Mr. Harris published a pamphlet against the restitution of the German colonies. Yet in his book “Dawn in Darkest Africa” (1914), he made a strong plea for the extension of the German colonies through incorporation of a part of the Belgian Congo. If Germany in 1914 was lit not only to govern her colonies, but to extend them, why should she be deemed incapable of doing this in 1917?

“Treated like Indian Rajahs.”

The same lamentable contradiction between reason in peace and rage in war may be seen, as already in­dicated, in the utterances of Sir Harry Johnston. In his book, “Commonsense in Foreign Politics” (London, 1913), he clearly and frankly recognized Germany’s dire need for colonial expansion and advocated arrangements which would enable her to extend her possessions in East Africa and the Gameroons. He likewise bespoke the extension of German influences in the Balkans and Mesopotamia. No word is said in this book of German incapacity for colonization. Even during the war, Sir Harry Johnston wrote in the “Daily News”:

“Germany was fortunate enough to be in a position to send out several good Governors, who were on excellent terms with the nat-