Richard (as they resume their seats): You were saying, Lord Arundel——?
Arundel: I was protesting yet once more, sir, against this monstrous suggestion of— of——
Richard: Of peace.
Arundel (unconscious of irony): Yes, of peace. England is not beaten, sir. She has had reverses, of course, but so has France. The spirit of the people is not broken, sir; the will to win is still there and we have a first-rate army. Once this armistice ends, there is nothing to hinder us from making a new invasion which will result in unqualified victory, a complete vindication of our policy, and a still greater glory for England.
Richard: And more cripples begging in the gutters, and more taxes to cover the cost!
It's certainly easy to see the appeal that this play would have had to an audience in the inter-war years, and it certainly is uncomfortable to read about a repeat pattern of career politicians dismissing peace in the hope of furthering nationalist agenda.
This was written in 1932, and tho the context is that of Richard II, some of the statements are easily transferable.
I also like Daviot's/Tey's/MacKintosh's descriptions of some of the characters:
Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester; a soldier and less composed edition of his brother Lancaster. He has the restlessness of all irritable men, and a perpetual air of being about to explode. An uncomfortable person.
The Earl of Arundel; who is the prototype of all those retired soldiers who believe that the world is going to the dogs. A stupid-looking individual, with small suspicious eyes which seem always searching for slights.
The Archbishop of Canterbury; Arundel's brother; as bland as his brother is prickly.