for either party, he says:--

"No one can foresee even the smallest part of the consequences of this
war. One thing, however, is certain, that it will leave the world in a
condition of the direst poverty. The destruction of capital is enormous,
not in one country, but in all of them. If the war ceased to-morrow it
would have impoverished all Europe beyond recovery for generations, but
that poverty, by itself, will probably be the least of its evils. It
will mean the paralysis of industry, the restriction of commerce,
unemployment on a scale that has never been known before, and it is an
anxious question how a hitherto powerful, well-paid, well-organized
population of workers will submit to the altered state of things. We
have had, from time to time, some ugly threatenings of socialism, but we
may fear that they are no more than the first mutterings of the storm
which will burst upon European society as soon as this war is over.

"This terrible danger, which may be on us within the next three or four
years, may well be worse than the war itself, and deluge Europe again in
blood. If anyone thinks that millions of working men, trained to arms in
every country in Europe, will settle down peaceably to starvation in
order to help to re-amass fortunes for their 'betters,' he may have a
rude awakening."

It is his attitude towards England, however, that has brought him into
conflict with the recruiting authorities--yet what is the following
passage, taken from his famous Lenten pastoral, but the purely Catholic
attitude of a bishop who looks to the head of his Church for guidance,
and seeing the Papacy neutral on the chaos, tries to keep the war fever
from spreading to his own flock, for, after all, he spoke as a
Churchman, not as a politician.

I think it is now universally admitted that Belgium was not the sole
reason of our entrance, as it will not be the sole reason of our
continuance, in the war; in a word, that it is really "British
interests" that are at stake.

The learned Irish Bishop merely puts the case in so many words--had we
not been engaged, the _Times_ might have said, "with the impartiality of
the blunt, plain-speaking Englishman."

He writes: "Then see the case of the small nationalities on whose
behalf many people have believed that the war is being waged.

"What good has it done for them? What part have they played in it except
that of catspaws for the larger nations that used them? Belgium delayed