Why?  I will tell you.  We discovered, many of us for the first time—­I do not pretend to say that I do not know much more about the machinery of commerce to-day than I did six weeks ago, and there are a good many men like me—­we discovered the machinery of commerce was moved by bills of exchange.  I have seen some of them—­wretched, crinkled, scrawled over, blotched, frowsy, and yet these wretched little scraps of paper moved great ships, laden with thousands of tons of precious cargo, from one end of the world to the other.  What was the motive power behind them?  The honour of commercial men.

Treaties are the currency of international statesmanship.  Let us be fair.  German merchants, German traders had the reputation of being as upright and straightforward as any traders in the world.  But if the currency of German commerce is to be debased to the level of her statesmanship, no trader from Shanghai to Valparaiso will ever look at a German signature again.  This doctrine of the scrap of paper, this doctrine which is superscribed by Bernhardi, that treaties only bind a nation as long as it is to its interest, goes to the root of public law.  It is the straight road to barbarism, just as if you removed the magnetic pole whenever it was in the way of a German cruiser, the whole navigation of the seas would become dangerous, difficult, impossible, and the whole machinery of civilization will break down if this doctrine wins in this war.

We are fighting against barbarism.  But there is only one way of putting it right.  If there are nations that say they will only respect treaties when it is to their interest to do so, we must make it to their interest to do so for the future.  What is their defence?  Just look at the interview which took place between our Ambassador and great German officials when their attention was called to this treaty to which they were partners.  They said:  ‘We cannot, help that.’  Rapidity of action was the great German asset.  There is a greater asset for a nation than rapidity of action, and that is—­honest dealing.

What are her excuses?  She said Belgium was plotting against her, that Belgium was engaged in a great conspiracy with Britain and with France to attack her.  Not merely is that not true, but Germany knows it is not true.  What is her other excuse?  France meant to invade Germany through Belgium.  Absolutely untrue.  France offered Belgium five army corps to defend her if she was attacked.  Belgium said:  ’I don’t require them.  I have got the word of the Kaiser.  Shall Caesar send a lie?’ All these tales about conspiracy have been fanned up since.  The great nation ought to be ashamed, ought to be ashamed to behave like a fraudulent bankrupt perjuring its way with its complications.  She has deliberately broken this treaty, and we were in honour bound to stand by it.