If professional soldiers, however high and patriotic their spirit, be treated as mercenaries--as if, in their dealings with their fellow-countrymen, they had neither souls nor consciences--it can be no matter for surprise if they should come by insensible degrees to think and act as mercenaries.... One set or other of party politicians--the occurrence is quite as conceivable in the case of a Unionist Government as in that of a Liberal--issues certain orders, which it would never dare to issue to a conscript army, and these orders, to its immense surprise, are not obeyed. Thereupon a Government, which only the day before {399} seemed to be established securely on a House of Commons majority and the rock of tradition, is seen to be powerless. The army in its own eyes--possibly in that of public opinion also--has stood between the people and injustice. It has refused to be made the instrument for performing an act of tyranny and oppression. Possibly in sorrow and disgust it dissolves itself and ceases to exist. Possibly, on the other hand, it glows with the approbation of its own conscience; begins to admire its own strength, and not improbably to wonder, if it might not be good for the country were soldiers to put forth their strong arm rather more often, in order to restrain the politicians from following evil courses. This of course is the end of democracy and the beginning of militarism. An army which starts by playing the popular role of benefactor, or liberator, will end very speedily by becoming the instrument of a military despotism. We need look no farther back than Cromwell and his major-generals for an example. We have been in the habit of regarding such contingencies as remote and mediaeval; none the less we had all but started on this fatal course in the spring and summer of last year. We were then saved, not by the wisdom of statesmen--for these only increased the danger by the spectacle which they afforded of timidity, temper, and equivocation--but solely by the present war which, though it has brought us many horrors, has averted, for a time at least, what is infinitely the worst of all. [Sidenote: SERVICE AND SUFFRAGE] The conclusion is plain. A democracy which asserts the right of manhood suffrage, while denying the duty of manhood service, is living in a fool's paradise. {400} A democracy which does not fully identify itself with its army, which does not treat its army with honour and as an equal, but which treats it, on the contrary, as ill-bred and ill-tempered people treat their servants--with a mixture, that is, of fault-finding and condescension--is following a very perilous path. An army which does not receive the treatment it deserves, and which at the same time is ordered by the politicians to perform services which, upon occasions, it may hold to be inconsistent with its honour, is a danger to the state.