difficulties an identical policy, certain if successful to lead to 
Peace, because based on the same assumptions. It is to be hoped 
that there will be a record of our efforts in order that it may be 
known that there were men who believed in human reason when 
only blind patriotic passion seemed to rule, and who had so much 
faith in the common instincts for good in their own countrymen. 
and their enemies that they dared to base their whole action on 
that faith. 
Memorandumn 5y Arthur Ponsonb /A. P.) 
Generally speaking the influence of the U. D. C. during the 
war period was exaggerated abroad. This is quite intelligible; 
such movements are always magnified on the opposite side. But 
U. D. C. influence must be divided into two parts — (1) influence 
Oon opinion, (2) influence on policy. 
(1) While in no way wishing to overestimate our influence on 
pinion, we were undoubted y the only force operating intel- 
ligently and systematically in the direction of peace by nego- 
tiations and we certainly attracted a fair number of people who 
in their various spheres were influential. We never had the herd 
with us — our followers were more or less picked men and women. 
But the best way to gauge our influence on opinion is to remember 
the active steps that were taken by the author.fties against us. (Im- 
prisonment of Morel, refusal of halls for meetings, suppressions of 
L-terature, inspired press abuse of ourleaders, and actual circulation 
from official sources of material to refute our arguments.) In 
fact the authorities were frightened of us because they saw we 
had influence, specially with Labour. If therefore at the end of 
1917 or the beginning of 1918 Lloyd George had definitely veered 
towards peace, 1 should say that we could have roused a large if 
not a sufficient body of support for him. 
(2) Our influence on policy was practically speaking nrl. To 
influence policy in this country you must have spokesmen or 
anyhow one leader who holds or has held some high position. 
Macdonald it is true had been Chairman of the Parliamentary 
Labour Party. Trevelyan had been in the Government, but neither 
of them were sufficiently prominent to command attention. The 
rest of us, some of whom were known publicly, were also not re- 
Cognised as leaders of public opinion. In all the Parliamentary 
660