New York Times Current History The European War, Vol 1, No. 1 Part 20

*An Anti-Christian War*

*By Robert Bridges.*

_To the Editor of The [London] Times_:

Sir: Since the beginning of this war the meaning of it has in one respect considerably changed, and I hope that our people will see that it is primarily a holy war. It is manifestly a war declared between Christ and the devil.

The conduct of the German conscripts has demonstrated that they have been instructed to adopt in full practice the theories of their political philosophers, and that they have heartily consented to do this and freely commit every cruelty that they think will terrorize the people whom they intend to crush. The details of their actions are too beastly to mention.

Their philosophers, as I read them, teach openly that the law of love is silly and useless, but that brutal force and cruelty are the useful and proper means of attaining success in all things. Shortly, you are not to do to others as you wish they should do to you, but you should do exactly what you wish they should not do to you; that is, you should cut their throats and seize their property, and then you will get on.

As for these enlightened philosophers, their doctrines are plainly an apostasy from the Gospel--and this they do not scruple to avow; and their tenets are only a recrudescence or rea.s.sertion of the barbarism which we hoped we had grown out of; it is all merely d.a.m.nable. But it seems to me that, judged only as utilitarian policy, it is stupid; and that they blundered in neglecting the moral force (for that is also a force) of the antagonism that they were bound to arouse in all gentle minds, whether simple or cultured. It was stupid of them not to perceive that their h.e.l.lish principles would shock everything that is most beloved and living in modern thought, both the "humanitarian" tendency of the time and the respect which has grown up for the rights of minorities and nationalities. Now, not to reckon with such things was stupid, unless they can win temporary justification by immediate success.

What success is possible for those who thus openly outrage humanity remains to be seen; but they cannot be allowed the advantage of any doubt as to what they are about. Those who fight for them will fight for "the devil and all his works"; and those who fight against them will be fighting in the holy cause of humanity and the law of love. If the advocacy of their bad principles and their diabolical conduct do not set the whole world against them, then the world is worse than I think. My belief is that there are yet millions of their own countrymen who have not bowed the knee to Satan, and who will be as much shocked as we are; and that this internal moral disruption will much hamper them. This morning I have a legal notice sent me from a German resident in England announcing that he has changed his name, for shame (I suppose) of his Fatherland.

All their apology throughout has been a clumsy tissue of self-contradictory lies, and their occasional hypocrisy has been hastily pretended and ill-conceived. The particular contention against us--that we were betraying the cause of civilization by supporting the barbarous Slav--does not come very convincingly from them if their apostle is Nietzsche, while the Russian prophet is Tolstoy.

The infernal machine which has been scientifically preparing for the last twenty-five years is now on its wild career like one of Mr. Wells's inventions, and wherever it goes it will leave desolation behind it and put all material progress back for at least half a century. There was never anything in the world worthier of extermination, and it is the plain duty of all civilized nations to unite to drive it back into its home and exterminate it there. I am, &c.,

ROBERT BRIDGES.

Sept. 1.

*English Artists' Protest*

_Art lovers in Great Britain have drawn up a protest against the vandalism of German soldiers. Copies of this protest have been sent to the Comte de Lalaing, Belgian Minister in London; the American Amba.s.sador, with a humble request that it may be forwarded to the President of the United States; and Baron Kervyn de Lettenhove, Art Adviser to the Belgian Government. Those who have signed include well-known collectors, Trustees of the British Museum, the National Gallery, the National Portrait Gallery, and the National Galleries of Scotland; the Director and Princ.i.p.al Librarian of the British Museum; the Directors of the National Gallery, the Victoria and Albert Museum, and the National Galleries of Scotland and Ireland; the Keepers of the Wallace Collection and the National Gallery of British Art; Keepers in the British Museum; the Joint Honorary Secretaries of the National Art Collections Fund, and many critics and others prominent in the art world._

The whole civilized world has witnessed with horror the terrible effects of modern warfare on helpless inhabitants of Belgium and France, and on ancient buildings and other works of art which are the abiding monuments of the piety and culture of their ancestors.

Some of the acts of the invading German army against buildings may be defensible from the military standpoint; but it seems certain from present information that in some signal instances, notably at Louvain and Rheims, this defense cannot hold good against the ma.s.s of evidence to the contrary.

The signatories of this protest claim that they are in no sense a partisan body. Their contention in this matter is that the splendid monuments of the arts of the Middle Ages which have been destroyed or damaged are the inheritance of the whole world, and that it is the duty of all civilized communities to endeavor to preserve them for the benefit and instruction of posterity. While France and Belgium are individually the poorer from such wanton destruction, the world at large is no less impoverished.

On these grounds, therefore, we desire to express our strong indignation and abhorrence at the gratuitous destruction of ancient buildings that has marked the invasion of Belgium and France by the German Army, and we wish to enter a protest in the strongest terms against the continuance of so barbarous and reckless a policy. That it is the result of a policy, and not of an accident, is shown by the similarity of the fate of Louvain, Malines, Termonde, Senlis, and finally Rheims.

Many of us have had the opportunity of showing that our love and respect for art are not bounded by our nationality, but we feel compelled to publish to the world our horror and detestation of the barbarous acts committed by the army that represents a country which has done so much to promote and advance the study of art and its history.

The signatories are:

DEVONSHIRE.

CHOLMONDELEY.

LANSDOWNE.

FEVERSHAM.

MABEL FEVERSHAM.

LEICESTER.

LONSDALE.

NORMANTON.

NORTHBROOK.

PLYMOUTH.

DILLON.

ALINGTON.

D'ABERNON.

ISABEL SOMERSET.

FREDERICK L. COOK.

AUDLEY D. NEELD.

HERBERT RAPHAEL.

SIDNEY COLVIN.

MARTIN CONWAY.

CHARLES HOLROYD.

FREDERIC G. KENYON.

HUGH LANE.

FRANCIS BEAUFORT PALMER.

C. HERCULES READ.

CECIL HARCOURT SMITH.

ISIDORE SPIELMANN.

HERBERT B. TREE.

WHITWORTH WALLIS.

CHARLES AITKEN.

OTTO BEIT.

MAURICE W. BROCKWELL.

A.H. b.u.t.tERY.

C.S. CARSTAIRS.

JAMES L. CAW.

HERBERT COOK.

D.H.S. CRANAGE.

LIONEL CUST.

CAMPBELL DODGSON.

CHARLES DOWDESWELL.

DAVID ERSKINE.

H.A.L. FISHER.

J.L. GARVIN.

PERCIVAL GASKELL.

ALGERNON GRAVES.

JAMES GREIG.

O. GUTEKUNST.

EDWARD HUTTON.

G.B. CROFT-LYONS.

D.S. MACCOLL.

ERIC MACLAGAN.

G. MAYER.

MORTIMER MENPES.

ALMERIC H. PAGET.