« PredošláPokračovať »
NOVEMBER 22, 1913
Editor-in-Chief HAMILTON W. MABIE
Contributing Editor R. D. TOWNSEND
In the absence of any definite or official statement last week either by the Mexican dictator
or by President Wilson as to. THE MEXICAN
the Mexican tangle, an air of MYSTERY
mystery and conjecture prevailed. Toward the end of the week it was reported that President Wilson had said that the situation was very much more favorable,” but declined to say in what respect.
One established fact is that Mr. Lind, the President's special agent in Mexico, and Mr. O'Shaughnessy, our Chargé d'Affaires at the Mexican capital, had several conferences with Huerta's representatives and that Mr. Lind returned to Vera Cruz. It is believed that Huerta declined to accept any plan looking to his own elimination. The time for seating the new Mexican Congress is at hand, and Huerta holds that only this Congress can pronounce on the validity of the so-called presidential election or of its own election, or arrange for a new election. Huerta (or his spokesman) exclaims with outraged feeling at the idea that he can control the action of the new Congress—a delicious bit of opéra bouffe in view of what he did to the last one. Incidentally may be quoted a newspaper letter from an American in Mexico : “ It is a fact sustained by proof that Huerta notified all his Governors in advance to send in election returns electing Blanquet and him ; also that he issued to them lists of names of men to be elected to Congress. Of course the ele ction was the veriest farce.”
Another of the few positive pieces of information of the week was that Mr. William Bayard Hale, presumably acting as an unofficial agent of President Wilson, visited General Carranza at Nogales, Mexico, over the line from Nogales, Arizona, and had conferences with him. It is asserted that the question of removing the embargo on arms from the United States was discussed and that Carranza continues to declare that this is
the only step needed to secure the success of the Constitutionalists. It is asserted also, but without positive evidence, that Mr. Hale asked for assurances of a free election and a responsible and satisfactory policy of government if Carranza should succeed in overthrowing the Huerta régime.
One of the most important events of the week was Prime Minister Asquith's explanation of Great Britain's position as regards Mexico and the United States. This is outlined and commented upon in an editorial on another page, in which is offered a plan of action for the United States. Mr. Asquith's explanation was followed by a despatch from Berlin, which says:
As a result of conferences between Count von Bernstorff, the German Ambassador, and Secretary Bryan in Washington, and Ambassador Gerard and the Foreign Minister in Berlin, Germany agrees with President Wilson that it is imperative that a man capable of restoring order and ending the chaos be placed at the head of the Government in Mexico.
On the whole, Germany agrees to support President Wilson's efforts to settle the situation, leaving it entirely to the United States to decide how best this can be done. The German Government insists, however, that present conditions cannot be allowed to continue much longer.
We also present in this number a review of the events in Mexico which have led to the present situation.
account we have seen) to be in the form of was defended by able counsel, including GruYes and No answers to two questions : zenberg, Karabchevski, Margolin, Zarudny, 1. Was Yuschinsky wounded within the Zatt
and Maklakof. Gruzenberg had already seff works in various parts of the body with
defended Jewish prisoners successfully in a intent to draw blood and then murdered? previous “ritual murder " trial, and is there
2. Was Mendel Beilis associated in the murder and actuated by superstitious motives ?
fore a man of experience in this field, as well
as a lawyer of distinguished ability. Maklakof The reply “No” to the second question is a leader of the Constitutional Democrats acquitted Beilis completely, but the reply in the Duma, and is generally regarded as “Yes” to the first seems to have been all one of the most eloquent and convincing but ordered outright by the Court, and to speakers in that body. The indictment of intimate a belief that the murder was for Beilis filled twelve and a half closely printed “ ritual ” or sacrifice purposes. The verdict newspaper columns, but only one-eighth of was received with a burst of applause in the it was devoted to the accused and the evicourt-room. Allowing for the pressure by dence against him. Court and Government, the acquittal of Beilis The Government, in the opinion of good is proof that the common people of Russia judges on both sides, failed to connect the may be trusted to do justice even though the accused with the murder in any way whatCzar himself may seek to do injustice. The
Its witnesses were mostly “ shady" Russian Government has always contended characters, criminals, or children, and their that the hatred of the common people for testimony was contradicted or completely overJews virtually forced it to adopt and pursue thrown. Two of them—Vera Cheberiak and an anti-Jewish policy ; but countless Russian the Black Hundred student Golubef—fainted protests against blood libel, together with the in the court-room and had to be removed. verdict, show that the haters of Jews, are not The former, who was the head of the gang the people of Russia, but the Czar, his asso- of robbers in the Cheberiak tenement-house, ciates and his Ministers. The jury was virtu- has been exposed as an adulteress, a fistally a peasant jury, drawn in a city where the fighter, and an acid-thrower, and, although
a popular prejudice against Jews is supposed to she is a Government witness, she has been be strongest, and yet it acquitted the accused convicted of fraud in another case and is in strict accordance with the evidence. No awaiting punishment. The impression made ritual murder case as important as this one even in conservative circles L'y the Governhas ever ended with a single trial, but if the ment's presentation of its alleged evidence Czar and Minister of Justice are well advised against Beilis may be summarized in the they will accept the verdict of the Kiev jury words of Prince Obolenski, ex-Procurator of as final, and make the vindication of Jews the Czar's Holy Synod. Speaking to an complete by arresting and bringing to justice interviewer from the St. Petersburg journal the real murderers, namely, the criminal Reitch," the Prince said : gang in the Cheberiak tenement-house.
• The charge of ritual murder made against the Jews has no more foundation than the
similar charge of using blood which was The trial took place before a bench of judges made at one time against the Christians. and a jury. The latter was composed From the indictment of the accused, and from
seven peasants, two towns- all the evidence thus far produced, I have men, and three petty Gov- come to the conclusion that the relation of
ernment officials. Its men- Beilis to the murder is no closer than that of tal and educational status was low, but no any other man. I have seen no proof which lower perhaps than that of the Russian would lead me to suppose that it was Beilis, common people in general. The prosecuting and not some other man, who committed the attorney for the Crown was a Government crime." barrister named Vipper, who, so far as we The ex-Procurator of the Holy Synod can can judge from the proceedings, is bold, un- hardly be regarded as prejudiced against the scrupulous, domineering, and extremely irri- Czar and in favor of the Jews. His opinion, table. He was assisted by two “civil prose- moreover, is supported by another dignicutors," Shmakof and Zamyslovski. The tary of the Holy Orthodox Church, Bishop latter is a Black Hundred member of the Nikon, who, in a similiar interview, said: Duma, and a fierce hater of the Jews. Beilis " It is absolutely impossible that Beilis
OF THE CASE
should have committed such a murder. Be- strative strikes.” If the Government begins sides that, the relations between the extreme a more active campaign against Finland, or zealots of the Russian faith and the Jews have orders the flogging of political offenders in become so hostile in Kiev that the charge of the Siberian prisons, or interferes with the ritual murder made by the former is incredi- paying of honor to the memory of a popular ble. Such half-insane zealots are capable of hero like Tolstoy, some class of the populaany action which they think likely to inflame tion goes on strike, for one day, two days, or Russians and Jews against each other.” more, as a demonstrative protest against
what it regards as injustice.
The beginning of the Beilis trial caused an No criminal trial since Nicholas II came to epidemic of strikes in nearly all the large cities the throne has created so much excitement and in most of the higher educational institu
in Russia as this. tions of the Empire. Seventy thousand factory THE PUBLIC EXCITEMENT
The popular in- and mill operatives went on strike in St. PetersOVER THE CASE
terest in the case burg, and many more thousands in Warsaw, was so great that the circulation of the daily Wilna, Riga, and other large Russian towns newspapers, and particularly the Liberal jour- where the liberal sentiment is strong or nals, almost doubled.
where the persecution of Jews is disapproved In Riga, for example, the street sales from In the universities and high technical schools the news-stands increased 20,000 in the first the protest against the “ blood libel” was three days after the trial began. Three wires almost unanimous. All, or most of the from Kiev to St. Petersburg were wholly students went on strike in the Universities of given up to telegrams and press reports St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev, Kazan, Sararelating to the case, and it is estimated that tof, Odessa, and Warsaw ; in the women's 100,000 words of " murder news” were tele- colleges of St. Petersburg, Moscow, and graphed from Kiev daily to the periodicals Kiev; in the women's medical institutes of of Russia and western Europe. There were St. Petersburg and Kiev; and in a dozen fifty reporters and special correspondents other colleges, institutes, or high technical in the court-room, and there would have schools in the capital or the provinces. been two hundred if all the press appli- There were demonstrative strikes in eleven cations for admission had been granted. of the higher institutions of learning in St. Twenty-one newspapers were suppressed, Petersburg alone. confiscated, or fined by the Government In addition to these manifestations of for comments on the testimony in the first popular feeling, the lawyers who conducted four days after the trial began, and some of the defense of Beilis have received nearly the confiscated papers were in such demand a hundred telegrams of encouragement and that the few numbers which escaped seizure sympathy, some of them from places as rewere eagerly bought up at five rubles ($2.50) mote as Archangel, on the White Sea, and a copy, and people who could not get them Russian towns in the Far East. borrowed them temporarily, and paid one ruble (50 cents) for the mere privilege of reading a single number.
On the 9th of October the Supreme Court But the popular interest in the case was of Korea rendered final judgment in the no more remarkable than the outburst of
case of Baron Yun
END OF THE KOREAN popular dissatisfaction which it caused. The
Chi-ho and five other
CONSPIRACY CASE prosecution of a Jew on the charge of
Koreans who were “ritual murder” was followed by appeals, accused of conspiracy to assassinate Count remonstrances, and protests in all parts of Terauchi, the Governor-General, and who, the Empire and from all classes of the popu- after conviction, were sentenced by the Taiku lation.
Court of Appeal to six years of penal serviOwing to the restraints of the “press cen- tude. The Supreme Court sustains the desorship and the denial of the right of pub- cision of the lower tribunal and confirms its lic assembly, the people of Russia have sentence. never been able to express dissatisfaction Thus ends a famous case which involved, through the newspapers, by public meeting, first and last, the fortunes of more than a or in any other normal way ; and they have hundred Christian converts, and which extherefore resorted, in late years, to “ demon- cited, a year ago, a great deal of interest and
Now that sufficient time has elapsed for their ardor to cool down, they have seen that our authorities are not such enemies of the Koreans as they once thought, nor are they bent on wiping out the Christian movement in Korea.' We believe that even these few American missionaries are
our good friends. As for the majority of the American missionaries in Chosen, they have been, from the beginning, very good friends of our authorities, and some of them have defended them in all sincerity and earnestness against unjust and unfounded foreign criticisms. All have loyally co-operated with our authorities in the work of uplifting the Korean people, and have proved themselves powerful allies.
not a little feeling in religious circles generally and in missionary circles particularly. One hundred and twenty-three prisoners, most of them Christian converts, were arraigned in the court of first instance, and one hundred and six of them were found guilty; but when the case was heard in the Taiku Court of Appeal, in March, 1913, one hundred of the accused were acquitted, for the reason, apparently, that there was no conclusive evidence against them except the confessions of guilt which they were said to have made in the course of the preliminary investigation. These confessions, they subsequently declared, were wrung from them by means of torture. No evidence was offered by their counsel in support of the torture charge, and no investigation of it was made, either in the Seoul local court or in the Taiku Court of Appeal. That some form of “ third degree " pressure was brought to bear upon the accused by the police is probable enough ; but it is almost certain that they were not subjected to the inhuman treatment which some of them described. The higher courts, however, gave them the benefit of the doubt, and acquitted all except Baron Yun Chi-ho, an ex
member of the old Korean Ministry ; Yang Keuitaik, of the Korean “ Daily News ;" An Tai-ku; Im Ching-chong; Yi Sung hun; and Ok Kwan-pin.
The Japanese Government has not "wiped out the Christian movement” in the peninsula, as the Continuation Committee of the Edinburgh Conference thought it would. On the contrary, it has treated all Christian workers in that part of the Empire, not only with fairness and tolerance, but with sympathetic consideration. The Government still continues to give 10,000 yen annually to the Korean Young Men's Christian Association ; private Japanese have contributed more than 2,000 yen this year to the same organization ; and Count Terauchi bimself has made a donation of 2,500 yen to the building fund of the Salvation Army.
Christian work in the peninsula has continued to prosper, and in his latest report of progress the GovernorGeneral states that there are now 2,102 Christian churches in Korea, with 281,000 native converts.
As an indication of the Japanese sentiment in Korea with regard to this incident, we quote from an editorial in the Seoul " Press :" • It is true that with regard to the conspiracy case a few American missionaries attacked our authorities in no moderate
Those who think that discussions of the Currency Bill are always dry and technical should
have been at the dinner THE CURRENCY
of the Economic Club of
New York City held at the Hotel Astor last week. It was the occasion of a remarkable debate upon the merits of the bill now before Congress—a debate in which Professor Joseph French Johnson, of the chair of Political E: nomy of New York University, and Mr. Frank A. Vanderlip, President of the National City Bank of New York City, opposed the bill, while Senator Owen of Oklahoma and Representative Carter Glass of Virginia defended it. The appearance of Senator Owen and Representative Glass in this debate was of special interest because they have been active in framing the Currency Bill, they stand sponsors for it, it bears their names, and is popularly known as the Glass-Owen Bill.
Aside from the value of this debate as a contribution to public knowledge regarding the creation and construction and provisions of the bill, it was a notable illustration of the power of the orator to influence his audience by sheer force of character and intelligence. We suppose Mr. Glass would be the last man to regard himself as an orator—indeed, he apologized for what he feared was the ineffectiveness of his address on the ground that as a journalist he was a better writer than speaker. But his apology was unnecessary. He was the last speaker of the evening and began at a late hour ; the financial sentiment of New York City is opposed to the bill, and therefore his audience of twelve hundred bankers and leading men of affairs was an unsympathetic one. Professor Johnson and Mr.
Vanderlip had preceded him and had spoken Government, and argued that they should be with authority and effectiveness—one with issued by the banks, as provided by the Althe authority of the scientific economist and drich Bill and as they are now issued under the other with the authority of the accom- the National Banking Act. For our part, we plished financier. But before Mr. Glass had have never been able to understand why a finished he had his audience with him, elicit- five-dollar National bank bill, bearing on its ing laughter for his incisive and witty com- face the name of the “ Cornwall National ments and loud applause for his clear reason- Bank," and circulating throughout the couning and for his manifestly accurate knowledge try because it is guaranteed by the United not only of the bill but of the history and the States Government, is not to all intents and operations of American finance. Twice when purposes a Government note. he essayed to stop he was greeted with loud But Mr. Vanderlip claims that the Glass cries of “Go on " from all parts of the room, Bill permits the Government to issue “fiat and his speech, one hour long, was listened
Mr. Glass exposed the weakness to with appreciative attention from beginning of this objection by pointing out that 3373 to end.
per cent of gold and 663/3 per cent of careMr. Glass accomplished perhaps more fully scrutinized assets, representing material than he himself realized in removing miscon- commodities, will underlie every dollar of the ceptions, misunderstanding, and prejudices new notes, and, moreover, that the Governregarding the bill, which unfortunately have ment will not redeem the bills in gold, unless prevailed to too large an extent in the finan- the regional bank responsible for them goes cial metropolis of the country.
into bankruptcy. It is true that there will be a fiduciary element—that is to say, a mere
promise-to-pay element–in the new notes, The entire country knows that the almost but there is the same, although much smaller, unanimous objection of the bankers to the fiduciary element in the notes of the Bank of
bill has been based England and the Bank of France. The THE ARGUMENTS OF
the feature of question is not whether the new notes will be
Government control. ' fiat” notes, but whether the fiduciary eleAs we have before pointed out, except with ment is too large a percentage of the notes. regard to the very important and fundamen- Some economists think that it is, some econotal principle of Government control the bill mists think that it is not. In our judgment, does not greatly differ in structure or in the only way this problem can be solved is potential operation from the bill of the Mone- by practice. If the Federal Reserve Board tary Commission, known as the “ Aldrich is of sufficient caliber and distinction, it can Bill,” which the bankers of the country sup- protect the country against the dangers of ported almost to a man.
so-called inflation of the promise-to-pay or The Aldrich Bill provided that the directors fiduciary element by regulating the rate of of the Central Reserve Association should be discount. elected by the bankers. The Glass-Owen Bill provides that the directors of the Fed- The most singular fact which was brought eral Reserve Board shall be appointed by the out at this dinner was the absolute rightPresident. It is true that the bankers claim
about-face which the that there are other fundamental differences.
bankers of the country
BANKING OPINION They protest that under the Glass Bill the
have made on the quesNational banks are compelled to come into tion of Government control. Six months the system by law, whereas the Aldrich Bill ago, having protested that the Glass Bill. promade their coming in a voluntary matter. vided too much Government control, the Mr. Glass demolished this objection by point- bankers now protest, if Mr. Vanderlip may ing out, amid the laughter and approval of be accepted as expressing the best sentiment his hearers, that the Glass Bill “compels the of American bankers, that the bill does not bankers to come in, while the Aldrich Bill insure sufficient Government control and made it impossible for them to stay out,” and power! pertinently asked what practical difference a Mr. Vanderlip, at the Economic Club banker could find in the two provisions. Mr. dinner, presented the outlines of a bill which Vanderlip objected that under the Glass Bill he has recommended to Congress. the circulatory notes are to be issued by the vides for the establishment of a United States
THE CHANGE OF