* * * * *


_September, 1915._

TO THE SAME.

"I wonder how long H---- 's 'delirious joy' at going to the front will
last. Those who have seen a campaign here are all thoroughly
converted to my view of fronts. I can't imagine a keener soldier than
F----, and even he says he doesn't care if he never sees another Turk,
and as to France, you might as well say, 'Hurrah, I'm off to Hell.'
Pat M---- goes as far as to say that no sane fellow ever has been
bucked at going to the front, as distinguished from being anxious to
do his duty by going there. But I don't agree with him. Did you see
about the case of a Captain in the Sikhs, who deserted from Peshawar,
went to England, enlisted as a private under an assumed name, and was
killed in Flanders? The psychology of that man would be very
interesting to analyse. It can't have been sense of duty, because he
knew he was flagrantly violating his duty. Nor can you explain it by
some higher call of duty than his duty as a Sikh Officer, like the
duty which makes martyrs disobey emperors. It must have been just the
primitive passion for a fight. But if it _was_ that, to indulge it was
a bad, weak and vicious thing to do. Yet it clearly wasn't a selfish
thing to do: on the contrary, it was heroic. He deliberately
sacrificed his rank, pay, and prospects and exposed himself to great
danger. Still, as far as I can see, he only did it because his passion
for fighting was stronger than every other consideration, and
therefore he seems to me to be morally in the same class as the man
who runs away with his neighbour's wife, or any other victim of strong