or the Welsh for their violated borders; but Germans only pity themselves.  They might take forcible possession of the Severn or the Danube, of the Thames or the Tiber, of the Garry or the Garonne—­and they would still be singing sadly about how fast and true stands the watch on Rhine; and what a shame it would be if anyone took their own little river away from them.  That is what I mean by not being reciprocal:  and you will find it in all that they do:  as in all that is done by savages.

Here, again, it is very necessary to avoid confusing this soul of the savage with mere savagery in the sense of brutality or butchery; in which the Greeks, the French and all the most civilised nations have indulged in hours of abnormal panic or revenge.  Accusations of cruelty are generally mutual.  But it is the point about the Prussian that with him nothing is mutual.  The definition of the true savage does not concern itself even with how much more he hurts strangers or captives than do the other tribes of men.  The definition of the true savage is that he laughs when he hurts you; and howls when you hurt him.  This extraordinary inequality in the mind is in every act and word that comes from Berlin.  For instance, no man of the world believes all he sees in the newspapers; and no journalist believes a quarter of it.  We should, therefore, be quite ready in the ordinary way to take a great deal off the tales of German atrocities; to doubt this story or deny that.  But there is one thing that we cannot doubt or deny:  the seal and authority of the Emperor.  In the Imperial proclamation the fact that certain “frightful” things have been done is admitted; and justified on the ground of their frightfulness.  It was a military necessity to terrify the peaceful populations with something that was not civilised, something that was hardly human.  Very well.  That is an intelligible policy:  and in that sense an intelligible argument.  An army endangered by foreigners may do the most frightful things.  But then we turn the next page of the Kaiser’s public diary, and we find him writing to the President of the United States, to complain that the English are using dum-dum bullets and violating various regulations of the Hague Conference.  I pass for the present the question of whether there is a word of truth in these charges.  I am content to gaze rapturously at the blinking eyes of the True, or Positive, Barbarian.  I suppose he would be quite puzzled if we said that violating the Hague Conference was “a military necessity” to us; or that the rules of the Conference were only a scrap of paper.  He would be quite pained if we said that dum-dum bullets, “by their very frightfulness,” would be very useful to keep conquered Germans in order.  Do what he will, he cannot get outside the idea that he, because he is he and not you, is free to break the law; and also to appeal to the law.  It is said that the Prussian officers play at a game called Kriegsspiel, or the War Game.  But in truth they could not play at any game; for the essence of every game is that the rules are the same on both sides.