Whilst Maude Egerton King in her editorial for The Vineyard (September 1914) stated
that they did not express political views, it is interesting to see what her husband, Joseph King,
MP said on the subject of the forthcoming outbreak of war in Parliament, as
recorded in Hansard (3rd
August 1914).
 |
| Newspaper headline, 5th August 1914 |
These speeches took place after 9pm on the 3rd
August. The next day Britain declared
war on Germany. After some preceding exchanges
where King was accused by other honourable members of making “a wicked
suggestion!” and another exclaiming “it is scandalous!”. King makes a
significant speech (see here for the full exchange). It is worth bearing
in mind that The Congregationalist
(March 23, 1911) records King as spending the summer term of 1885 “at Geissen
University, where ….he translated some of his (Dr Harnack’s) works into
English. From Geissen he proceeded to
Berlin, but his stay there was cut short through the death of his mother”:
Mr King “I say without any hesitation that the House and the
country has not sufficiently realised that if we are going into this war, it is
a war against German civilisation, and the German people who are our friends,
and the German Government is not. The
bureaucracy and the military caste that mismanaged, and I believe grossly
mismanaged, the affairs of Germany, are the enemies of the peace of Europe, and
it is that caste and those men that we have to stand out against. Old man as I am, if I were asked to take up
arms and fight myself against those men, I would be glad to do it. But the misery and tragedy of the position is
this: We cannot fight against those masters of tyranny, and against those men
who misgovern, without fighting at the same time against the German people.
That is what puts many of us in the gravest difficulty. That is what makes this matter to me
personally a question of intense pain and trial, I have many dear personal friends
in Germany whom I value and respect and love as much as any men on earth, and
to think that from this time forward, not only for a few years but perhaps for
the rest of my life, I am to be estranged from the influence of those men by a
tragedy of this sort is something which I cannot contemplate in silence or
light-heartedly say that it must come, and it is not something I can allow to
come to pass without uttering one more warning, and if it be not too late a
plea for reconsideration of this question.
When we are going into a war like this, we cannot say we are fighting
for the small independent State of Belgium.
I admit that is a noble object on which to shed blood and money. We cannot even say that we are fighting for
the integrity and independence of a great Power like France. We must look upon this question as a whole,
and remember that we are fighting for Russia when we fighting against Germany,
and that if Germany stands for tyrannical Government, Russia stands for
atrocious tyrannical Government. "
Sir J. D. Rees “Is the hon. Member in order in accusing a
friendly Power of atrocious tyrannical government? I believe it has been ruled that an hon.
Member is not in order in using such language in regard to this particular
Power.”
Mr. Deputy-Speaker “I do not think the hon.Member was going
quite so far as the hon. Baronet has indicated.
I may perhaps again suggest that it does not add to the strength of the
hon. Member’s case to use language of that kind.”
 |
| Joseph King, MP reproduced courtesy of Haslemere Educational Museum |
Mr. King “I shall be glad to withdraw anything I have said
which is inappropriate or objectionable, but I cannot put aside this plain
fact, that in Russia at the present moment you have 100,00 people in prison
without a trial. You have three executions
a day, or over 1,000 a year, of men who are executed under martial law without
even a semblance of a trial at all. You
have, moreover, this fact, that a few weeks ago, just before the time of
mobilisation on Russia, you had uprisings, strikes, and threats of civil war,
such as have not been known there for half a dozen years. As one who has tried to understand the
affairs of Russia, I believe that this diabolical mobilisation of the forces of
Russia was largely occasioned by her own internal difficulties. In order to save the position, the emoluments
and the prerogatives of men in power in that land, they have mobilised their
Army, and thrown the whole of Europe into a conflagration of war. They have done that not from any patriotic
motives, not because they really want to preserve any great ideal, but because
their own position, power, and place are in ganger. Remember – I remember it and I cannot forget
it, and as far as it is in my power I
will make others remember it – that if we are fighting against Germany we are
fighting for Russia, and if we are fighting for Russia at the present time we
are fighting for an amount of tyranny and injustice and cruelty which it is
quite impossible to think of without the deepest indignation. We must not ook merely at the question of the
neutrality of Belgium, and the freedom of attack of the Northern ports of
France – after all, these ports are only small spots in the great field of
war. Let us least least carefully
consider the whole question, and let us realise something more of the great
issues involved.
 |
“I shall only touch upon one more aspect which seems to me
not without deep significance. Only five
weeks ago we heard of the assassination of the Crown Prince of Austria-Hungary,
and we all know that is was the assassination that has led by a strange, swift
series of events to the present terrible state of affairs. When, on Tuesday the 30th June,
the Prime Minister came down to the House and proposed a Resolution which was
accepted in solemn silence, and with the deepest feeling and approval, I
believe that by the whole House, absolutely irrespective of parties or
personalities, he moved an address of sympathy not only with His Imperial and
Royal Majesty the Emperor of Austria and the King of Hungary on the part of
this House, but their sympathy also with the peoples of the Dual Monarchy. He spoke in words which impressed the House
deeply at the time, and said we felt “a tender respect for the great family of
nations of which the Austrian Emperor is the head, and our hearts go out to
them in affectionate sympathy.” It is
affectionate sympathy five weeks ago for the men and the peoples of the nations
that we are going to wage war against perhaps to-morrow! That seems to me a tragic, and I would go
further and say a bitter and cynical fact.
Is our foreign policy so shifting and changing, so liable to sudden
emotions and rapid evolutions, that the people to whom we express with absolute
unanimity one day our affectionate sympathy we declare to be our foes the
next? Whatever this House decides to do,
whatever may be the line taken by the Government, I may add perhaps, and add
seriously, that whatever mistakes of taste or language I have made here
to-night, I am not afraid and I am not ashamed to have stood up here and said
that this is not a simple question of the neutrality of Belgium, nor a simple
question of whether the Northern ports of France shall be shelled and
bombarded. It is a question we must
consider in all its bearings, and I believe, from all I have heard and all I
can think and judge of this question, that the policy of the Government has
been too precipitate and that they have not sufficiently realised that though
they may fight for the right, honour and just cause in one part of Europe, they
on this occasion will be fighting for tyranny, injustice, and reaction in
others parts of Europe.”
No comments:
Post a Comment