sentiment, while really
seeking only good. Such people were saved by their natural goodness and
sense from becoming actual and purposeful enemies of their country. But
as "Little Englanders"--so they were called--they managed, with the best
intentions, to do their country infinite harm.

But there were others, the naturally vicious and unscrupulous, the
morbid, the craven, the ignorant, the self-seeking; these were the
dangerous exponents of the sentiment. With them, Little Englandism
progressed in this wise: "There are plenty of foreigners just as good as
the British; their rule abroad is just as good as ours." Then: "There
are plenty of foreigners far better than the British; their rule abroad
is better than ours." Then: "Let the people of our Empire fend for
themselves among other peoples; our business is to look after
ourselves." Then: "We oppose the people of the Empire; we oppose British
rule; we oppose the British." From that to "We befriend the enemies of
the British" was less than a step. It was the position openly occupied
by many, in and out of Parliament.

"We are for you, for the people; and devil take Flag, Empire, and
Crown!" said these ranters; drunken upon liberties they never
understood, freedom they never earned, privileges they were not
qualified to hold.

There were persons among them who spat upon the Flag that protected
their worthless lives, and cut it down; sworn servants of the State who
openly proclaimed their sympathy with the State's enemies; carefully
protected, highly privileged subjects of the Crown, who impishly slashed
at England's robes, to show her nakedness to England's foes.

And these were supporters, members, proteges of the Government, and
readers of the _Daily Gazette_, upheld in all things by that organ. And
I, the son of an English gentleman and clergyman, graduate of an English
university, I looked to this party, the Liberal Government of England,
as the leaders of reform, of progress, of social betterment. And so did
the country; the British public. Errors of taste and judgment we
regretted. That was how we described the most ribald outbursts of the
anti-British sentiment.

It is hard to find excuse or palliation. Instinct must have told us that
the demands, the programme, of such diseased creatures, could only
aggravate the national ills instead of healing them. Yes, it would seem
so. I can only say that comparatively few among us did see it. Perhaps
disease was too