THE ETHICS OF SPYING.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3203, 26 April 1911, Page 8

THE ETHICS OF SPYING.

IS SPYING HONOURABLE?

Both English and German newspapers have agreed to- take the Leipzig trial very good-naturedly said the “Manchester Guardian,’ in writing of the trial of two English officers for spying in Germany last year. ‘We have both been found out, 'they are saying in effect to each other, but let us be good friends on the basis of mutual suspicion. To the marriage of true minds a liberal use of private detectives need be no impediment. We like the optimism of that view and value its motives; but, after all, is it quite wise to gloze over the danger and discredit of international espionage? “The ethics of spying are a thorny topic, but we ought not on that account to avoid it. There is no end of casuistry of the subject. The use of spies in" war time is considered to be legitimate. but the spy is always liable if lie is caught to the disgraceful punishment of hanging. Why should it be accounted honourable to employ spies and dishonourable, to be one? Apparently there are two codes of honour—one for the nation, the other for the individual; the nation is not dishonoured by accepting services which are regarded as dishonourable to the individual. The paradox becomes sharper when espionage is practised in- time of peace. In war it may justly be said a nation is fighting for its existence, and cannot always pick fastidiously _ among the means offered of saving its skin; besides. jspies and stratagems are recognised in war, and the enemy is supposed to be on his guard against them. The outbreak of war is what, the lawyers would call constructive notice that stratagems may be expected. But the employment of spies in peace time negatives the idea of perfect friendship, and gives the lie to the public professions on both sides. It taints with insincerity the- political efforts that are being made to ensure peace. Politics cannot be carried on in watertight compartments. These stratagems of war will percolate through from your war department and damage' your advocacy of peace. ‘Our own War Office Manual in its article on ‘Spies and Stratagems’ lays it down that r an officer may feign to be a traitor for the purposes on ensnaring an enemy who attempts to corrupt his fidelitv. but if he voluntarily makes overtures to the enemy under pretences of being a traitor, and then deceives the enemy with false information, his conduct is dishonourable and contrary to the rules of war.’ Dishonourable and contrary to the rules of war as it is, the practice is not unknown in peace time, but is said to be a favourite device on the Continent for confusing the possible future enemy with a mass of contradictoy information, so that- he shall not know the truth even when by chance lie gets it.” .