some facts of first importance, and directly bearing upon the present position of the commonwealth and the war. War which many defound us unprepared, But it had been fore To-day the empire, from its heart to the most distant outpost, is in arms! War is upon us! clared impossible; but which, had it would inevitably have destroyed us. seen and its outbreak finds us calm. It had been prepared for, and we face its consequences with confidence and courage. To whom is due the fact that Australia at this great crisis is able not only to protect its sea-borne commerce and great cities from the depredations of the enemy's ships of war, and to defend the commonwealth generally, but to dispatch, in record time, an expeditionary force of 20,000 men, properly armed and equipped, to fight the battle of the empire oversea, and by relieving the British navy-upon which our very existence rests—from the task of defending these shores, to enable that navy the more effectively to protect the heart of the empire? To whom is due the fact that to-day Australia has a "fleet in being"-the most powerful, the most effective in the Pacific, excluding only Japan? To the Labor Party alone these things are due. That Australia is able to face and deal with this crisis in its present spirit of calmness and confidence is due to the policy of the Labor Party. Let us prove it. In 1910, when the Labor Government assumed office, there was neither navy, army, nor wireless system. During its term of office, Labor built a navy, created that organization without which ships of war are mere useless scrap iron; made provision for the training of its officers and men; established dockyards, naval bases, and depots. In short, it created a “fleet in being." It established an effective military force where before there was none. It made an army fit to take the field and defend the country. It armed and equipped this army with up-to-date weapons. In short, it created the great and complex organizations necessary for a thoroughly modern and efficient system of defense, and it developed that organization in every necessary detail. It established training colleges for officers, instructional corps for non-commissioned officers; small arms, ammunition, cordite, and accoutrement factories. Above all, in the face of much opposition, with inflexible resolution and purpose, Labor effected a veritable evolution by engrafting the system of universal military training upon the civic life of the commonwealth so that to-day Australia presents the spectacle of a nation in arms arrayed for her own defense. The naval and land defense forces of Australia to-day are the work of the Labor Party, and that party alone. THE POSITION OF THE AUSTRALIAN SOCIALIST PARTY ON CONSCRIPTION AND THE ELECTIONS The Socialists, largely because of the success of the Labor Party, are not very strong in Australia. Nevertheless they have flourishing organizations in the two leading cities, Sydney and Melbourne, as well as in certain mining and industrial centers, especially Broken Hill. Their criticism of the military policy of the Labor Party, and their opposition to the war-both before and after its outbreak-are, therefore, of some moment as indicating, at least, the probable line of future attack on the Laborites. We quote from the Melbourne Socialist of July 24th: QUESTIONS TO BE PUT TO POLITICAL CANDIDATES Australia and New Zealand alone among civilized countries compel voteless boys to undergo military training. Will you vote for the removal of this blot on the statute book? There are between 30,000 and 40,000 persons liable for nonregistration under the defense act, while 27,000 prosecutions have taken place in three years, equaling one prosecution for every five trainees. What amendment of the act are you prepared to support? In the eleven months to May 31, 1914, there was one defense prosecution for every ten trainees, and in the first quarter of 1914 1,278 lads were sent to fortresses, barracks, etc. Seeing that, after three years' trial, compulsory military training is still so unpopular, are you in favor of a referendum as to its continuation? Do you consider danger from invasion so imminent as to render necessary a compulsory military system which has driven many boys from their homes and necessitated the prosecution of conscientious objectors? Australia pays more per head for defense purposes than any other country except Great Britain and France, and the expenditure is rapidly increasing. Do you not think there is grave danger of crippling national development? If so, what action do you suggest should be taken? SPECIAL QUESTIONS FOR LABOR CANDIDATES The Labor Party in England, U. S. A., New Zealand, and elsewhere is strongly against any form of compulsory military training, and labor organizations are endeavoring to abolish it wherever it is in force. Can you explain why the Australian Labor Party is an exception? The Australian defense scheme is largely modeled after the Swiss. Seeing that the Swiss soldiery has been used against strikers on thirteen occasions in recent years, how can you, as a workingman's representative, support such a system? Are you in favor of amending the defense act so as to prevent the permanent militia and volunteer forces being called out to shoot down strikers? Are you in favor of the repeal of Clause 98, so as to prevent the possibility of Australian workers being sentenced to death for mutiny, by court-martial, consequent upon their refusal to shoot their fellow Australian citizens? THE CANADIAN SOCIALISTS AGAINST THE WAR The Socialists of Canada are somewhat more numerous than those of Australia, though not so strong as the newly organized Social Democratic Party of New Zealand (organized in opposition to the New Zealand Labor Party). All three organizations were opposed to the war, and after it was declared, to the participation of these Colonies. A paragraph from the manifesto of the Social Democratic Party of Canada follows: The rude god of war gallops across the world in a saddle of steel and sneers and laughs in savage glee. He wades in blood. His own sweet music is the rattle of rifles and a million sobs and groans from broken hearts. Brute force reigns supreme, and to the roar of Christian cannon thrusts brotherhood off the stage. Morally, capitalist civilization stands bankrupt and ragged before the world, mockingly murmurs a prayer for help, and grinds its sword for the throat of labor. Let the Socialists everywhere hold street meetings and hall meetings. Unfold to the workers the true meaning of war. Let those who make war go to war. The other Socialist Party (The Socialist Party of Canada) took a similar position. Notwithstanding its opposition to the war, the Social Democratic Party of New Zealand succeeded, in combination with the labor unions, in electing eight members to the Parliament of that country in the elections of December, 1914-which demonstrates that antimilitarism is not altogether unpopular in New Zealand. CHAPTER XIII FRANCE THE French Socialists now have 102 out of 584 members of the Chamber of Deputies and 1,400,000 votes, the vote having increased by 300,000 in four years. It either has a majority or is very near to having a majority in the larger part of the cities and large towns of the country. It will be noted that the declarations of the Party on July 28th, like that of Jaurès in Brussels on July 30th (see Chapter IX), insist that the French Government was doing everything to avoid war. It will be noted also that Austria and Germany are regarded as the aggressors. Nevertheless, until the invasion of their country, the Party, as will be seen, was opposed to the participation of France in the war. The opening paragraphs of the party declaration are as follows: Citizens: The fundamental anarchy of our social system, the competitions of capitalist groups, colonial ambitions, the intrigues and brutalities of imperialism-the policy of rapine of some, the policy of pride and prestige of others have created a permanent tension in Europe for the last ten years, a constant and growing risk of war. The peril has been suddenly increased by the aggressive proceedings of Austro-Hungarian diplomacy. Whatever may be the grievances of Austria-Hungary, whatever may be the excesses of nationalist pan-Serbism, as has been declared by our Austrian comrades, Austria could have obtained all necessary guarantees without recourse to the threatening and brutal note which suddenly gives rise to the menace of the most revolting and frightful of wars. Against this policy of violence and the brutal methods |