As for the German, his opinion can be succinctly summarised. Before the War he regarded the Englishman from a military point of view as a negligible quantity, from the commercial point of view as a back-number, and from the diplomatic point of view as the easiest thing on earth. Now, according to latest official intelligence from Potsdam, it was the reptile statesmanship of England that conspired with France and Russia to invade peaceful Germany, and it is "English gold" that has lured the people of America to disastrous participation in the common doom of the Allies. As a soldier, the Englishman has done better than Potsdam expected: but only by shameful contravention of the usages of war. The Prussian is a great stickler for etiquette in this respect. War to him, whether he be emitting chlorine gas or sinking a hospital ship, is a serious--nay, sacred--business. But the imbecile English persist in regarding war as a game. What is worse, they win the game. Not long ago a regiment of "Kitchener's Army" captured a strongly fortified village from the Prussian Guard. That was bad enough, but the manner in which it was done amounted to nothing less than an outrageous breach of professional etiquette. They went to the assault kicking a football! Their commander kicked off, and they never stopped until they had kicked the ball, riddled with bullets, into the trench and captured the garrison. And yet the English have the temerity to complain of German breaches of International Law! Yes, I fear the English are most harshly spoken of in Germany just now. There remains one other point of view to consider, and that is the Irish point of view. It must have a chapter to itself. Ireland usually gets a chapter to herself. FOOTNOTES: [1] Sir Douglas Haig. [2] Admiral Beatty. [3] Sir William Robertson. [4] Lord Findlay. [5] A. Bonar Law, who is half Canadian, and Arthur James Balfour. [6] David Lloyd George. [7] Sir Edward Carson. CHAPTER FOUR One of the first queries put to a Briton by an American after the pair have achieved a certain degree of intimacy, is: "Why can't you people settle the Irish Question?" The form of the query varies in intensity. Earnest well-wishers say: "I don't profess to understand the ins and outs of the matter, but wouldn't it save a deal of trouble all round if you were to _give_ them Home Rule and have done with it?" Candid friends say, quite simply: "If you English can't run Ireland yourselves, why not let the Irish have a try?" (Here again we may note that England, not Great Britain, gets the blame.) Finally, a well-meaning but ferocious lady wrote to me the other day from the Middle West, to enquire: "How does England dare to pose as the champion of Belgium, when all the while she is grinding poor Ireland under her heel?"