large/7264/free_press_1206_librivox_64kb_mp3/freepress_12_belloc_64kb_68
large/7264/free_press_1206_librivox_64kb_mp3/freepress_12_belloc_64kb
English
7264
But when the "New Republic" prints pacifist propaganda by Brailsford, or applauds Lane under the alias of "Norman Angell," it is  in my view  eccentric and even contemptible. "New Ireland" helps me to understand the quarrel of the younger men in Ireland with the Irish Parliamentary party  but I must, and do, read the "Freeman" as well. BUT WHEN THE NEW REPUBLIC PRINTS PACIFISTS PROPAGANDA BY BRAILSFORD OR APPLAUD'S LANE UNDER THE ALIAS OF NORMAN ANGEL IT IS IN MY VIEW ECCENTRIC AND EVEN CONTEMPTIBLE NEW IRELAND HELPS ME TO UNDERSTAND THE QUARREL OF THE YOUNGER MEN IN IRELAND WITH THE IRISH PARLIAMENTARY PARTY BUT I MUST AND DO READ THE FREEMEN AS WELL
rs living, and when he points out in the "Action Française" that the French Supreme Court committed an illegal action at the close of the Dreyfus case, he is doing useful work, for he is telling the truth on a matter of vital public importance. But when he goes on to say that such a thing would not have occurred under a nominal Monarchy, he is talking nonsense. Any one with the slightest experience of what the Courts of Law can be under a nominal Monarchy shrugs his shoulders and says that Maurras's action may have excellent results, but that his proposed remedy of setting up one of these modern Kingships in. France in the place of the very corrupt Parliament is not convincing. The "New Republic" in New York vigorously defends Brandeis because Brandeis is a Jew, and the "New Republic" (which I read regularly, and which is invaluable to-day as an independent instructor on a small rich minority of American opinion) is Jewish in tone. The defence of Brandeis interests me and instructs me. E OF THE MOST POWERFUL WRITERS LIVING AND WHEN HE POINTS OUT IN THE ACTION FRANCIS THAT THE FRENCH SUPREME COURT COMMITTED AN ILLEGAL ACTION AT THE CLOSE OF THE DRY FIST CASE HE IS DOING USEFUL WORK FOR HE IS TELLING THE TRUTH ON A MATTER OF VITAL PUBLIC IMPORANCE BUT WHEN HE GOES ON TO SAY THAT SUCH A THING WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED UNDER A NOMINAL MONARCHY HE IS TALKING NONSENSE ANY ONE WITH THE SLIGHTEST EXPERIENCE OF WHAT THE COURTS OF LAW CAN BE UNDER A NOMINAL MONARCHY SHRUGS HIS SHOULDERS AND SAYS THAT MARAT'S ACTIONS MAY HAVE EXCELLENT RESULTS BUT THAT HIS PROPOSED REMEDY OF SETTING UP ONE OF THESE MODERN KINGSHIPS IN FRANCE IN THE PLACE OF VERY CORRUPT PARLIAMENT IS NOT CONVINCING THE NEW REPUBLIC IN NEW YORK VIGOROUSLY DEFENDS BRANDYCE BECAUSE BRANDYCE IS A JEW AND THE NEW REPUBLIC WHICH I READ REGULARLY AND WHICH IS INVALUABLE TO DAY AS AN INDEPENDENT INSTRUCTOR ON A SMALL RICH MINORITY OF AMERICAN OPINION IS JEWISH IN TONE THE DEFENCE OF BRANDYCE INTERESTS ME AND INSTRUCTS ME
large/7264/free_press_1206_librivox_64kb_mp3/freepress_12_belloc_64kb
file
download/librilight/large/7264/free_press_1206_librivox_64kb_mp3/freepress_12_belloc_64kb.flac