Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

who would sully the soul of her child. That husband and father deserves only dishonor who, for the sake of quiet, would not resist to the uttermost those who would assault his wife or injure his child. Parents may abandon self-defense against those who attack them individually, but they have no right to abandon the defense of their children.

Government is organized defense of others. It was said the other day by the late Secretary of State that a mayor in time of riot could consistently advise citizens to keep off the street. That, however, is not the analogy to the present occasion. A mayor who would allow without resistance a mob to dictate to him orders to keep citizens off the street ought not to be allowed to hold his office for an instant. The city that does not undertake to protect its population against murderers, cutthroats, and gunmen has no government. The nation that will not pro

tect its citizens at home and abroad has no right to the name of nation, for it lacks the essentials of government.

One reason why Americans have a right to be proud of their Nation's history is that in the earliest days of its life the United States showed itself willing to sacrifice blood and treasure for the protection of the rights of its citizens. Against England in 1812 it set itself for the sake of defending the freedom of the seas. In defiance of the unholy Holy Alliance this Nation asserted its determination to prevent the extension of European autocracy to this hemisphere. Still earlier in its life, when it had many domestic difficulties to contend with, it undertook to do what the nations of Europe had during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries been unwilling or afraid to do in ridding the Mediterranean of the Barbary pirates who infested it.

In a letter to The Outlook Mr. Everett P. Wheeler recalls some of the sayings as well as the deeds of that day. In 1801. Captain Bainbridge was sent to the Mediterranean with a frigate. And in 1803, under President Jefferson, a squadron was sent there. In a letter to the Secretary of the Navy, Commodore Rogers declared that "all the Barbary States, except Algiers, appear to have a disposition to quarrel with us unless we tamely submit to any propositions they may choose to make.” Later, a naval agent of the United States, in agreement with Hamet, the elder brother of the Bashaw of Tripoli, got together a small

than

The

force of five or six hundred men, and these, with the co-operation of two United States naval vessels, bombarded the citadel of Derne and took it by storm. The Pope publicly declared that "America had done more for Christendom against the barbarians all the Powers of Europe united." Admiral of the British fleet in the Mediterranean, Sir Alexander Ball, wrote to Commodore Preble, "You have done well in not purchasing a peace with money." And Jefferson himself wrote in 1805 to Judge Tyler: "There is reason to believe the example we have already set begins already to work on the disposition of the Powers of Europe to emancipate themselves from that degrading yoke. Should we produce such a revolution there, we shall be amply rewarded for what we have done."

If,

When the population of this country was small, its resources limited, its finances hardly recovered from disorganization, our Government had the courage and the skill to deliver our citizens from degrading submission to the exaction of the Mediterranean pirates. now that we are large and rich and strong, we are too timid to deliver our citizens and to help to deliver other neutrals from the exaction of a new form of piracy, it will be to our shame. As Madison wrote in his annual Message of December 15, 1815, the measures which our Government took, followed up by a larger squadron, afforded a "reasonable prospect of future security." It is the business of the American Government to-day to afford a reasonable prospect of future security against lawlessness on the high seas.

It is not sufficient that this country should merely defend its own citizens. It must, as it did in those first years of the nineteenth century, take its share in the burdens of maintaining law throughout the world. It is not knighterrancy that invites us; it is a plain duty that commands us.

If, then, we are to take our full part, we must have the means by which to take it. The disorderly and lawless are not quelled by words. And it is not sufficient for us to organize for National security. We must organize to help establish international security.

This is the significance of the conference in Philadelphia last week to which we have already referred. That conference looks toward peace, but it looks first toward some method of establishing justice, and in doing

[graphic]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

so it recognizes the need for defending justice with arms. The American people must not be content until this Nation is fit to take part in the world's work.

To that end no one proposes a great standing army, no one proposes any unnecessary burden or any peril of establishing here the methods and policies of militarism; but all Americans should unite in insisting that there should be established here a system of democratic defense. It should be a part of every citizen's duty to take his place in helping to defend, not merely his country's territory, but his country's obligations.

The President has spoken of his belief in a citizenry trained and accustomed to arms. Switzerland has such a citizenry. Every democracy ought to have such a citizenry. Have we? Every one knows that we have not.

Our immediate duty is to bring our regular army to such a standing in efficiency and

numbers as to provide for this country its National police as a first line of defense. Our second duty is, through such means as the summer military camps for students, to provide training to a sufficient number of educated young men so that there will be a fair supply of officers for a citizen army when it is called into being. And our third duty is to see that there are available men enough to constitute an army as fit for the purposes of the American democracy as the Swiss army is fit for the purposes of the democracy of Switzerland. And parallel with this threefold duty is the duty to make our navy, which must necessarily be a professional body, sufficiently strong to provide insurance against disaster at the outset.

Preparation "against war," as Secretary Garrison has happily put it, is thus preparation for taking our share of the world's duty to maintain world law.

F

THE PRESIDENT'S LATEST NOTE TO

GERMANY

A POLL OF THE INTERNATIONAL PRESS

OR the third time, affirms the Washington "Herald," "President Wilson presents an incontrovertible case against Germany." Since the announcement of the establishment of a German war zone the Administration has addressed three notes to the German Government. The first was the "strict accountability " note; the other two concerned the Lusitania.

Simply and clearly, and with the utmost courtesy, notes the Rochester "Union and Advertiser," Mr. Wilson informs the German Government that in the matter now in dispute between us we stand just where we did when he despatched his first note to Berlin.

There is no harsh sound about this latest note, remarks the Worcester "Telegram," no suggestion of war to enforce American claims. "The paper is more forceful than the first Lusitania note to Germany, but less liable to irritate the Government on the other side. It waives all quibbling."

The note has also brought forth hearty praise from such keen critics as the New

York "Sun "and the Philadelphia "Ledger." The first says:

More than ever patriotic Americans must admire the constructive skill and dialectic ability with which their representative, the Administration of President Wilson, has marshaled the precepts of law and the forces of moral sentiment for the convincing of a great and hitherto always friendly Power that justice is with us and that the right course is Germany's best course.

And the second:

Had documents descendants, and were there a posterity of glorious pronouncements, the line would leap from the Magna Charta to the immortal Declaration, run nobly down to the Emancipation Proclamation, and find at length a worthy scion in the great utterance which has gone to Berlin as the deliberate and irrevocable position of a people apt in the practice of humanity and impregnated with the principles of liberty.

But not all newspapers are as enthusiastic. The Peoria "Transcript" says of the note:

There is less of irony and defiance than was contained in the first one. . . . The latest note smells of the lamp. Parts of it remind us of

the President; other parts are unfamiliar. The statements of fact contained in the German reply are rather curtly, though respectfully, dismissed in the rejoinder.

The Knoxville "Sentinel" discriminates thus:

The first feeling inspired by the note in those who have been following the President sympathetically is apt to be one of disappointment at the exceedingly conciliatory tone of it, almost approaching humility, and the lack or rather studied repression of vigor and aggressiveness except in the restatement of the principle of "humanity" under the law for which the United States stands.

And the New York "Tribune:"

Judged in connection with the events of the last few days and measured by the anticipations of a new birth of firmness and vigor at Washington, which they excited, the new note to Germany will prove a disappointment.

Judged even apart from those events and expectations, and comparing it on its intrinsic merits with the notes of February 10 and May 13, it must appear weak and inconclusive. We cannot feel that it expresses with the necessary earnestness and incisiveness the attitude of the great mass of Americans toward the outrages committed on the high seas by German submarine commanders-outrages which culminated in the Lusitania massacre.

The country expected still more concrete and positive assertion of our position as the champion of neutral rights. It gets an assertion milder in form, and open doors wider than ever to prolonged and dilatory diplomatic discussion.

To all of which the Boston "Journal" replies:

Any state paper might seem flat after the masterly handling of the situation by the President's first statement. Mr. Wilson last May made it difficult for the public to be satisfied with commonplace modes of expression.

But certainly no normal peace advocate could complain of Mr. Wilson's spirit or his words.

MATTER

As to the matter of the note, there is no weakening of the American position, no suggestion of a compromise, declares the Cleveland "Leader." Nor does the new note, adds the Philadelphia "Telegraph," yield to the German request for delay and further controversy over the issue involved. "It does not yield any part of the position taken by the United States Government in its note of last month."

In the opinion of some papers- -the New York" Journal of Commerce," for example

[ocr errors]

the note" is little more than a courteous but forcible and firm reiteration of that to which the German communication was a response.' In the opinion of other papers, however— the Washington "Times," for instance:

The President . . . does more than stand by the position which he adopted for this country in earlier communications. . . . Not only does he stand firmly by his earlier attitude; with punctilious correctness he declines to be led aside from the essentials which he then stated into a rambling discussion of alleged facts and irrelevant principles. . . . He wants Germany to talk about the things he is talking about, not about the things Germany would prefer to talk about and the things its Government did talk about in its note of May 28.

[blocks in formation]

"Staats

The better-known New York Zeitung" also says: "Certainly, the tone and contents of the Wilson note are not to be regarded as forming an ultimatum."

While the President "does not send to Germany an ultimatum," as the New York "Herald" points out, he does "formally ask the Imperial Government for assurances that measures hereafter will be adopted to safeguard American lives and American ships on the high seas. That is the vital line in the message. What will Germany do about it?" The Harrisburg " Patriot " concludes thus:

The primary pressing question that Germany is asked to answer is: Do you stand with or against civilization? In the event that the Kaiser acquiesces in this matter, the crisis is averted; if he refuses, Washington may be counted upon to preserve unsullied the honor and integrity of this great country which we call Home.

At the same time, in the opinion of so sharp a critic as is the Chicago “Post,” a striking excellence of the note is its " strong, fair, and adroit declaration of our own understanding of Germany's feeling. It lies in the President's announcement of his willingness to act as an intermediary with Great

Britain 'in an attempt to come to an understanding by which the character and conditions of the war on the sea may be changed."" The same sentiment is expressed in near-by Milwaukee. We find the "Sentinel" of that city saying:

A hopeful and very significant paragraph is that in reply to the intimation on the part of Germany that her Government is still open to an arrangement with Great Britain for mitigating this war of reprisals.

THE PRESIDENT UPHELD

It was characteristic of Colonel Roosevelt, says the Brooklyn "Citizen," that when he heard of Bryan's resignation from the Cabinet and the reason for it he should have taken the first opportunity to pledge his support to the President. The paper adds:

Former President Taft was one of the first to pledge his support to the President. Both of the former Presidents, who differ in many mat ters, are of one mind in seeing the necessity for all Americans with influence to stand behind the President.

It is this unity of purpose which strengthens the President's hand and enables him to take a firm stand in the protection of American rights and interests against a foreign Power. This is instinctively felt by the people and accounts for their condemnation of Mr. Bryan, who chose to create the impression that the American people are divided in their support of the policy for which Woodrow Wilson' stands.

Mr. Roosevelt's statement is as follows: According to Mr. Bryan's statement, he has left the Cabinet because President Wilson, as regards the matters at issue with Germany, refuses to follow the precédent set in the thirty all-inclusive arbitration commission treaties recently negotiated, and declines to suspend action for a year while a neutral commission investigates the admitted murder of American men, women, and children on the high seas, and, further, declines to forbid American citizens to travel on neutral ships in accordance with the conditions guaranteed to us by Germany herself in solemn treaty.

Of course I heartily applaud the decision of the President, and in common with all other Americans who are loyal to the traditions handed down by the men who served under Washington, and by the others who followed Grant and Lee in the days of Lincoln, I pledge him my heartiest support in all the steps he takes to uphold the honor and the interests of this great Republic which are bound. up with

the maintenance of democratic liberty and of a wise spirit of humanity among all the nations of mankind.

Says the Burlington "Free Fress:" With Theodore Roosevelt announcing that he "stands by the President," the question at once suggests itself, "Who is against the President in this contingency?" We must stand by him even though we may not approve of everything he may do about the tariff and preparedness, and so on.

The New York "Evening Post" says:

Mr. Wilson has confined himself to those matters which alone give the United States a standing in court. But he has been able, in presenting American claims and making American demands, to constitute himself the champion of all neutral nations and the upholder of the fundamental doctrines of international law. This is the great réason why foreigners are now paying him such notable tributes. And this is the main reason why, his fellow-countrymen, thankful as they are that a man of his sane strength and clear ability should have been in the White House at a time like this, ought to applaud and support their. President. He is serving them, but he is also serving civilization.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

The widely read Berlin "Mittag Zeitung says of the note: "The alarming messages which the Reuter Bureau appended to the Bryan resignation must be taken back to-day. There is neither an ultimatum nor any threatening language toward Germany in the note."

The Berlin"Lokalanzeiger," which generally reflects the Government's view, if, indeed, it is not directly inspired by it, immediately after the sinking of the Lusitania presented one German point of view, intimating intimidation, as follows:

We do not wish to gain the love of the Americans, but we desire to be respected by them. The loss of the Lusitania will earn that respect for us more than a hundred battles won on land.

This Prussian paper seems to be modifying its tone; for now it says, with a rather lumbering effort to appear mollified:

We need not close up our department of incoming and outgoing declarations of war, which heretofore has worked nobly, but it seems that

we can curtail the output somewhat without incurring a reputation for excessive caution.

[ocr errors]

The Lokalanzeiger" also prints a noteworthy article on German-American relations by its general director, Herr Eugen Zimmermann, which, coming on the heels of the foregoing conciliatory article, is taken to mean that influential representatives of politics and business are standing behind this paper and exerting their efforts for an American-German understanding.

"President Wilson," says Herr Zimmermann, "desires nothing more and nothing less than an understanding between Germany and England concerning the forms of maritime warfare, which at the same time will insure the safety of American passengers. The task is not light, considering the development of naval war, but it can be solved if all interests display good will."

Finally, the article ventures to indicate for the first time to the German public that there may be a second side to the question of arms shipments, on which the press for months has been harping.

The popular "Vossische Zeitung," of Berlin-"good old Tante Voss," as Berliners dub it says:

President Wilson's note creates no new situation between Germany and America, but its honorable and carefully weighed tone will help to clear up the existing situation. There can be no difference of opinion about Mr. Wilson's final aim-that the lives of peaceful neutrals must be kept out of danger. What we can do and what America must do to achieve this will require negotiations between us and America which must be conducted with every effort toward being just and by maintaining our standpoint in the friendliest spirit.

In a later number of "Tante. Voss," however, Herr Georg Bernhard, a political writer, in an article on the American note, says the Germans are too jubilant over the tone and contents of the note. "There is no justification for the joyfulness," says Herr Bernhard, because of the, essential differences which exist between Germany and the United States," and it adds:

66

Not one of those differences has been removed by the exchanges of notes. Of course we are pleased that the United States is willing to submit to England all of our commissions, but we have no new commissions.

America told us she would take the initiative in preventing England from a future misuse of naval warfare. This we greeted thankfully. If America's representations are unsuccessful, she may repeat them. Whether the German sub

marine warfare can be moderated depends solely on the attitude of England.

On this hear the influential "Berliner Tageblatt:"

The Washington Government shows an honest desire to arrive at an agreement. This is a characteristic of the American note... The note indicates that America by no means takes the position that the German Admiralty must issue an order to end the submarine warfare before any negotiations can be entered upon. Giving up submarine warfare is only hinted at by implication. Germany's humanity is appealed to entirely in general terms and merely the expectation is expressed that the lives of American citizens and their property will be spared in the future.

When, on November 2, the North Sea was declared to be a war zone, a protest should have been raised. That was the time for a protest in America's own interest. International law was first violated by England. Did America become indignant over that unfriendly act? Americans will hardly assert that. Complete neutrality would best serve America's own interest. We have complete confidence that the friendly relations between America and Germany, which the American Government emphasizes in the note, will smooth a way for the American Government's understanding, and so help right and humanity to victory.

In the same paper Herr Paul Michaelis writes as follows:

The note is now being submitted to a thorough examination by the proper German authorities. It simplifies a serious position, and it is plain it does not entirely bar the way to a friendly agreement, even admitting the possibil. ity that the German Government may have been right concerning the Lusitania's guns and cargo.

The note maintains the principle that submarine war on mercantile vessels is contrary to humanity, but the German Government never left the slightest doubt of that. It only decided to adopt submarine war when England compelled it by a naval war contrary to all rules of humanity.

American offers of friendly services to mediate between Germany and England are in line with Germany's previous suggestions. When England grants freedom of the seas, Germany will have no objection to modifying her submarine war.

FRENCH COMMENT

The French press seems thoroughly satisfied with the American note, declaring that its firmness and dignity of tone fulfills expectations. In particular, the Paris "Temps," perhaps the weightiest newspaper authority

« PredošláPokračovať »