should be left alone and independent.  The one thing they fear is, I think, not so much that their integrity but that their independence should be interfered with.  If in this war which is before Europe the neutrality of one of those countries is violated, if the troops of one of the combatants violate its neutrality and no action be taken to resent it, at the end of the war, whatever the integrity may be, the independence will be gone.

I have one further quotation from Mr. Gladstone as to what he thought about the independence of Belgium.  It will be found in Hansard, volume 203, page 1787.  I have not had time to read the whole speech and verify the context, but the thing seems to me so clear that no context could make any difference to the meaning of it.  Mr. Gladstone said: 

We have an interest in the independence of Belgium which is wider than that which we may have in the literal operation of the guarantee.  It is found in the answer to the question whether, under the circumstances of the case, this country, endowed as it is with influence and power, would quietly stand by and witness the perpetration of the direst crime that ever stained the pages of history, and thus become participators in the sin.

No, Sir, if it be the case that there has been anything in the nature of an ultimatum to Belgium, asking her to compromise or violate her neutrality, whatever may have been offered to her in return, her independence is gone if that holds.  If her independence goes, the independence of Holland will follow.  I ask the House from the point of view of British interests, to consider what may be at stake.  If France is beaten in a struggle of life and death, beaten to her knees, loses her position as a Great Power, becomes subordinate to the will and power of one greater than herself—­consequences which I do not anticipate, because I am sure that France has the power to defend herself with all the energy and ability and patriotism which she has shown so often—­still, if that were to happen, and if Belgium fell under the same dominating influence, and then Holland, and then Denmark, then would not Mr. Gladstone’s words come true, that just opposite to us there would be a common interest against the unmeasured aggrandizement of any Power?

It may be said, I suppose, that we might stand aside, husband our strength, and that, whatever happened in the course of this war, at the end of it intervene with effect to put things right, and to adjust them to our own point of view.  If, in a crisis like this, we run away from those obligations of honour and interest as regards the Belgian Treaty, I doubt whether, whatever material force we might have at the end, it would be of very much value in face of the respect that we should have lost.  And do not believe, whether a Great Power stands outside this war or not, it is going to be in a position at the end of it to exert its superior strength.  For us, with a powerful fleet, which we believe able to protect our commerce, to protect our shores, and to protect our interests,—­if we are engaged in war, we shall suffer but little more than we shall suffer even if we stand aside.