| OCR Text |
Show MlTISH Iff :j OVER SEAP0WEH One Faction Declares the Granting of Armistice Had Political Affect By E. G. FITZHAMON, Staff Correspondent Universal Service (Special Cable Dispatch. Copyright, H'lS by Universal Service.) LONDON. Nov. "-1. Outcroppings ol British public opinion during tho lnsi twenty-eight hours and expressions bv members of parliament since its prorogation proroga-tion indicate that concern for the maintenance mainte-nance of British sea power is more genulno and widespread than Is the belief be-lief in making impossible another world war. While the British pacifist minority I; endeavoring conscientiously to encompass the reduction of armaments as tho first step toward the creation of a league oi nations, the jingoes are preparing to notify no-tify the world in unmistakable terms that Britannia rules the waves and figures fig-ures on keeping right oi in the wave-ruling wave-ruling ousiness. regardless of what other nations may think. Another large section of British opinion is expressing the view that the armistice was granted prematurely, for political effect ef-fect in the United States and here. This element points to the election hero two days prior to the expiration of the armistice armi-stice in the belief that it is a foregone i conclusion that the present government will be re-endowed with power at the polls while everything is hanging fire. In some quarters it is also asserted that the groundwork for the armistice was prepared pre-pared hurriedly at Washington, immediately imme-diately prior to the elections in the United States. The general belief here appears to be that the ex-kaiser is only playing possum pos-sum now. There is, in deed, an increasing increas-ing feeling that sweeping military movement move-ment against the German empire should have been allowed, and, in fact, the war sli ou Id have been carried on until the kaiser, his sons and the .generals of high command had surrendered themselves to the allies, similar to when Napoleon III and staff surrendered In 1SVU. Even with regard to the "freedom of the seas," which is at present the all-absorbing all-absorbing topic of discussion here, the Times and Morning Post, the chief exponents ex-ponents of Britain's naval policy, are coming out boldly in behalf of the maintenance main-tenance of British maritime supremacy, with a soft, pedal on disarmament. The Times said .today, editorially: 'Let there be no mistake that if what la meant by the 'freedom of the seas' is a real and substantial diminution of sea power, such as would result from the abolition of the blockade, this country could never consent to It, least of all at the end of a war that could never have been won without sea power." The Morning Post says: "Great Britain is an island nation to whose possession the sea is the road. It follows that the first and essential condition con-dition of the security of the British empire em-pire is to keep open the road of the sea In time of war for British use while shutting it to the uses of the enemy. "These are the elementary principles of British national policy. The victorious close of the campaign at sea has revived the undying faith of the British that their health, wealth and prosperity depend upon the maintenance of maritime supremacy." |
