Page:Great Speeches of the War.djvu/237

 the Scheldt to be open. Our interest in that matter then, as now, was relatively small and insignificant. But what was Mr. Pitt's reply? I quote you the exact words he used in the House of Commons—they are so applicable to the circumstances of the present moment. This is in 1793. "England will never consent that another country shall arrogate the power of annulling at her pleasure the political system of Europe established by solemn treaties, and guaranteed by the consent of the Powers." [Cheers.] He went on to say, "that this House (the House of Commons), in substantial good faith to its engagements, if it retains a just sense of the solemn faith of treaties, it must show a determination to support them." [Cheers.]

Yes; and it was in consequence of that stubborn and unyielding determination to maintain treaties, to defend small States, to resist the aggressive domination of a single Power, that we were involved in a war which we had done everything to avoid, which was carried on upon a scale both as to area and as to duration up till then unexampled in the history of mankind. That is one precedent. But let me give you one more. I come down to 1870, when this very Treaty, to which we are parties no less than Germany, and which guarantees the neutrality and independence of Belgium, was threatened. Mr. Gladstone was then Prime Minister of this country—[cheers]—if possible a stronger and a more ardent advocate of peace even than Mr. Pitt himself—Mr. Gladstone, pacific as he was, felt so strongly the sanctity of our obligations that, though here again, we had no direct interest of any kind at stake, he made agreements with France and with Prussia to co-operate with either of the belligerents if the other violated Belgian territory. And I should like, gentlemen, to read a passage from a speech ten years later, delivered in 1880, by Mr. Gladstone himself in this city of Edinburgh—[cheers]—in which he reviewed that transaction, and explained his reasons for it. After narrating the facts which I have summarized, he said this: "If we had gone to war (which he was prepared to do), we should have gone to war for freedom; we should have gone to war for public right; we should have gone to war to save human happiness from being invaded by a tyrannous and lawless Power. That," Mr. Gladstone said, "that is what I call a good cause, gentlemen, and though I detest war, and there are no epithets too strong, if you could supply me with them, I will not endeavour to heap upon its head, in