the United States, of the power of earning his livelihood by arranged lectures on subjects unconnected with the war. The Times is the most active supporter of that war; but its support is intelligent, and it speaks as the mouthpiece of the country's intelligence as well as of its force. May I therefore appeal to it to use its great influence to discourage the persecution of an Englishman of whose accomplishments and character the nation may well be proud, even in the hour when his conscientious conclusions are not accepted by it?"
"Westminster Gazette," September 5, 1916
"We sympathise strongly with the protest made by Mr. W. H. Massingham in a letter to the Times against the order forbidding Mr. Bertrand Russell to reside in any military area in the United Kingdom. We need not say that Mr. Bertrand Russell's views regarding the war are not ours, but we recognise in him a man of high intellectual distinction, and one who, however wrongheaded he may be about the war, and its origins, would be incapable of any such action as is contemplated in the prohibitions of the Defence of the Realm Act. In this case a wrong use is being made of the powers of the military authorities to persecute a man who is capable of high service to the nation in literary and scientific fields."
"Daily News," September 16, 1916
". . . Now there may be a case for forbidding Mr. Russell to continue his propaganda. There may be a still better case for prosecuting him—a much honester way of dealing with him. But, if his activities are a peril to the State, it is ridiculous to pretend that, while perilous in maritime towns, they will be
