View source for Speech of Bonar Law, Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons, December 21, 1916

<p align="right"> [[Main_Page | WWI Document Archive ]] > [[1916 Documents]] > [[Official Communications and Speeches Relating to Peace Proposals 1916-1917]] > '''Speech of Bonar Law, Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons, December 21, 1916'''</p><hr>

'''Speech of Bonar Law, Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons, December 21, 1916<sup>1</sup>'''<br>

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The House will readily understand that I am divided between two <br>
desires. It is the general desire of the House, I think, that we should <br>
rise to-morrow, and if that is to be done it is quite impossible that a <br>
subject so vast as that which we have just been discussing can be <br>
properly debated to-night. I am going to try to set an example by <br>
saying very little indeed on the burning questions which have been<br>
raised in the course of the debate. In regard to the speech of the hon. <br>
member who has just sat down, I at least who have only run vicarious <br>
risks have no right to throw taunts at a man who has had his place in <br>
the fighting line. At the same time, I am compelled to say that if the <br>
spirit of the speech to which we have just listened were to permeate this <br>
country, then, in my belief, all the blood and treasure which have been <br>
spent in this war will have been spent in vain. I do not think that he <br>
or anyone needs to impress upon us what are the horrors of this war. <br>
If there were ever any who love war for itself — I have always hated <br>
it — if there were any whose imaginations were moved by the pomp and <br>
panoply of war, we know better now what it is. It is not glorious <br>
victories, or the hope of them, that is moving the hearts of the people <br>
of this country. What we think of is the men — our own nearest rela- <br>
tions — who are suffering the hardships which have been pointed out <br>
to us. What we are thinking of are the desolate homes to which life <br>
will never return again in this world. What we are thinking of are <br>
the maimed and wounded whom we see going about our streets. We <br>
do not love war, and if I saw any prospect of securing the objects for <br>
which we have been fighting by a peace to-morrow, there is no man in <br>
this House who would welcome it more gladly than I would. <br>
But what is the position? The hon. gentleman says — I hope no <br>
one will think that in quoting his words I have any party view in <br>
mind — "Let us trust to the old Liberal traditions; let us trust to the <br>
good hearts of those we are dealing with." Why are we in this war <br>
to-day? Why are we suffering the terrible agonies which this nation <br>
is enduring? It is because we did trust Germany; because we <br>
did believe that the crimes which have been committed by them would <br>
never be committed by any human being. It is all very well to say, <br>
"Let us get terms of peace." Can you get any terms of peace more <br>
binding than the treaty to protect the neutrality of Belgium? Can <br>
you come to any conclusion upon paper or by promise which will give <br>
us greater security than we had before this war broke out? Where <br>
are we to find them? I hope that not this country alone, but all the <br>
neutral nations of the world, will understand the position that has now <br>
arisen. Germany has made a proposal of peace. On what basis? On <br>
the basis of her victorious army. <br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The hon. member who spoke last tells us that if we win the victory <br>
there will be conscription for ever in this country. But what will be <br>
the position if peace is settled on the basis of a victorious German <br>
army? Is there any man in this House who has honestly con- <br>
sidered not merely the conditions in which this war was forced on <br>
the world, but the way in which the war has been carried on — is there <br>
any man in this House who honestly believes that the dangers and <br>
miseries from which we have suffered can be cured in any other way <br>
than by making the Germans realize that frightfulness does not pay, <br>
and that their militarism is not going to rule the world? <br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I ask the House to realize what it is we are fighting for. We are not <br>
fighting for territory; we are not fighting for the greater strength of <br>
the nations who are fighting. We are fighting for two things, to put <br>
it in a nutshell: We are fighting for peace now, but we are also <br>
fighting for security for peace in the time to come. When this <br>
German peace proposal comes before us, not only based on Ger- <br>
man victories, but when they claim that they are acting on humanitarian <br>
grounds, when they treat it, to put it at the best, from their point of <br>
view, as if they and the Allies were at least equal — let the House con- <br>
sider what has happened in this war. Let them consider the outrages <br>
in Belgium, the outrages on sea and land, the massacres in Armenia, <br>
which Germany could have stopped at a word, if she had wished to <br>
do so. <br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Let them realize that this war will have been fought in vain, utterly <br>
in vain, unless we can make sure that it shall never again be in the <br>
power of a single man or of a group of men to plunge the world into <br>
miseries such as I have described. <br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;When the hon. gentleman talks about peace on these terms, I ask <br>
anyone in this House or in the country this question: Is there to be no <br>
reparation for the wrong? Is the peace to come on this basis, that the <br>
greatest crime in the world's history is to go absolutely unpunished? <br>
It is not vindictiveness to say that. It is my firm belief that unless <br>
all the nations of the world can be made to realize that these moral <br>
horses of which the hon. gentleman spoke have to be shown in action — <br>
unless we realize that, there never can be an enduring peace in this <br>
world. I am not afraid of my countrymen. We have been told <br>
that the troops at the front will fight to the end, to secure what <br>
they think is necessary as a result of this war. I am sure that they will. <br>
I am sure also that our fellow countrymen at home who up till now <br>
have made few sacrifices, except the sacrifice of those dear to them, <br>
are determined in this matter, and that if they can be made to believe, <br>
as I am sure they can, that the objects for which we are fighting can <br>
be secured, then there is no sacrifice which they will not be prepared <br>
to make. I am afraid I have said more than I intended when I rose, <br>
but I could not refrain from expressing what I felt on this subject.<br>

<hr>
<sup>1</sup><i>The Times</i>, London, December 22, 1916