226 J.-A. PEMBERTON
all.’^494 She noted that those liberals and humanitarians who would nor-
mally show concern for the welfare of dependent peoples had had been
‘so busy applying their liberalism and humanity to Germany’ and dep-
recating at the same time British practice in the colonial field, that they
risked abandoning a central truth: that ‘restitution to Germany of her
former colonial possessions would not be in the interests of the subject
races.’^495
Perham reminded those participating in the discussion of Nicholson’s
presentation that Germany was the antithesis of Britain in terms of free
institutions, that is, in terms of avenues for public criticism and for
reform and that Britain’s free institutions had served as powerful checks
on the abuse of colonial power. She warned that a ‘native society’ would
crumble under the pressure of the ‘twentieth century European indus-
trial exploitation’ that Goebbels had in recent days indicated he would
impose on ceded colonies.^496 Perham pointed out that Britain was just
beginning to understand that ‘imperialism was not a good thing’ as it
demoralised both the ruler and the ruled. She observed that because
of its demoralising effect, many in Britain hoped that in the ‘not very
far-distant period,’ imperialism would be brought to an end.^497 The way
of bringing it to an end, she added, was expressed in the covenant’s pro-
vision concerning the mandatory obligation of teaching subject peoples
to stand alone, an obligation which Hitler, she again noted, had treated
with derision.^498
Perham acknowledged that there was a tendency abroad ‘to sneer at
the assumption of responsibility for the natives,’ adding that as a result
many of those opposed the cession of colonies to Germany had retreated
from ‘this apparently vulnerable position’ and had instead based their
opposition to cession on the less assailable grounds of imperial and stra-
tegic interests.^499 An example of the tendency to which Perham referred
(^497) Ibid., 44.
(^498) Ibid.
(^499) Ibid. See also Wood, Peaceful Change and the Colonial Problem, 105, 114–15.
(^494) Nicholson, ‘The Colonial Problem,’ 42.
(^495) Ibid.
(^496) Ibid., 43.