The British Institute of Public Opinion, in a sampling of voters' minds last week, found that three out of four Britons were in favor of continuing the war. One in four either did not know what he wanted or wanted immediate peace. Foreign newsmen estimated that the "peace party" in the House of Commons did not number more than a score of the 615 M.P.s. No attempt was made by the British Government to silence the tongues of would-be peacemakers, and opinions which in other countries in wartime would land a man in jail were freely uttered. But both inside and outside Parliament, Britons learned that peace, like politics, makes strange bedfellows:
>Britain's individualistic literati carried on a violent, open discussion in the newspapers on peace v. war. Most outspoken and extreme was incorrigible Playwright George Bernard Shaw, who wrote an unsolicited (and unpaid for) letter to the Manchester Guardian which plugged this way for peace:
"What I want from Mr. Chamberlain is complete frankness. . . . What Mr. Chamberlain has got to declare now is whether he is going to bomb Berlin or not. If he does the consequences will go far beyond our maddest intentions and will be quite different from anything either we or Herr Hitler contemplate. If not, the sooner we stop the war and arrange for the tabling of our respective grievances. . . the better. . . . Our Premier's pledge to Poland was quite explicit. We were to come to her aid 'with all our resources,' which meant that when the first German soldier crossed the Polish frontier the Royal Air Force would bomb Berlin."
Later, would-be Peacemaker Shaw, asked by London's Daily Worker, Communist organ, whether he favored peace negotiations and an immediate armistice, answered: "I'm in favor of negotiations . . . but a philosopher—or a God—might hold that, as the 1914-1918 war was well worth while because it got rid of the German, Austrian, Turkish and Russian Empires, this one might be worthwhile if it got rid of the British Empire: not a very pleasant process for us. . . . But the sooner the order is given to cease fire and turn up the lights the better."
> Disagreeing with Playwright Shaw was Biologist Julian Huxley, who chose the London Times as his forum: "We cannot survive as a great power unless we smash Hitlerism; but if we are to prevent the growth of a new Hitlerism later, we must plan some kind of new international order." Scientist J. B. S. Haldane, who as a rule has fairly fresh ideas, wanted: 1) peace negotiations now; 2) an arrangement for "all peoples to be allowed free elections to determine their own form of government," a faithful echo of 1919 Wilsonian self-determinism.
> Still at large last week was Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists, who has often publicly admired Herr Hitler and his methods. His news organ Action was no more censored than was the Times. All during the crisis that led up to the war Führer Sir Oswald Mosley sounded off against Britain's "fighting for Poland." Fortnight ago London bobbies only yawned when Sir Oswald held an outdoor peace meeting in the West End. Last week the British Fürhrer advocated peace by directing his followers to stick up posters reading: "MIND BRITAIN'S OWN BUSINESS."