Springfield weekly Republican. [volume], August 19, 1915, Page 2, Image 2

About Springfield weekly Republican. [volume] (Springfield, Mass.) 1851-1946

Image provided by: Boston Public Library

                
2
PAN-AMERICA AND MEXICO
The pan-American appeal to the Mexi
can factions is infused with a palpably
sincere - sympathy with the distracted
country and no critic possessing the least
fairness could see in it the slightest wish
for anything but the welfare of Mexico.
Signed as .it is by the diplomatic repre
sentatives of six nations of this hemis
phere, the appeal is one of the most re
markable documents in Latin-American
history and it certainly has a significance
in Latin-American relations with the Unit
ed States not surpassed by any state paper
since the first formal exposition of the
Monroe doctrine.
No one can be very hopeful that the ap
peal will command the acquiescence of all
the factions in Mexico. But through this
form of interposition in Mexican affairs,
which seems the least offensive to Mexican
pride of any that could be devised, prog
ress may be made toward the pacification
of the country. It is to be assumed that
the president has considered all possible
contingencies, especially one arising from
Gen Carranza's refusal to heed the call.
How far the president can carry with
him the La tin-American governments in
his future program is not at present ap
parent, yet in their participation up to the
present point .one sees evidence of Latin-
America's approval, in principle, of the
spirit which has animated him in dealing
with the Mexican problem.
THE GERMAN PROPAGANDA
Disquieting reports of the excessive zeal
of German propagandists in this country
have been circulating for months—disquiet
ing in that, if true, the reports revealed
little regard for the legitimate interests of
the United States by the agents of the Ger
man government. Several newspapers
have been conspicuous in making grave
charges. It is declared that the German
embassy itself has been concerned in “wil
‘ful and persistent violations" of our neu
trality laws. An immense German spy sys
tem, one reads, has the country in its coils.
German money has been used among our
people in a way inconsistent with interna
tional friendship. The Providence Journal
reaches the climax of its bitter accusa
tions in tracing to German representatives
connected with the German embassy a plot
to finance a new military movement by
Gen Huerta in Mexico for the sake of em
barrassing the United States government in
dealing with the Mexican question. While
this charge has seemed incredible, it is a
sample of the rumors and accusations which
fill the air and in some measure creep into
print.
That the United States secret service has
been much occupied in recent weeks in in
vestigations of pro-German activities may
be taken for granted. It is certain that
there have been passport frauds. Our neu
trality laws may in some cases have been
violated, if certain charges be well found
ed. And in regard to the persistent agi
tation against the exports of war supplies,
it is necessary to remember that there
is at stake a traditional policy of
our government, which has now been
so lucidly, powerfully and convincing
ly defended in Secretary Lansing's note
to the Austro-Hungarinn government. The
general effect upon the public mind is to
Increase suspicion of German activities in
this country, especially among the more in
tense sympathizers with the powers of the
Quadruple entente. At this moment the
New York World begins the publication of
private letters, reports and memoranda of
the “lost, strayed or stolen-" description
which, in its opinion, prove that “the Ger
‘man propaganda in the United States has
‘become a political conspiracy against the
‘government and people of the United
‘States” There must be great hesitation
and unwillingness to accept a conclusion
which indicts Gorman activities in America
with such severity. The evidence in sup
port of it needs to be most carefully and
dispassionately scrutinized.
It would not require much evidence to
convince one that rhe pro-German weekly
paper, the Fatherland, published in New
1 ork. is subsidized by the German gov
ernment through i'r agents in this country.
The World's concrete evidence on this
point may carry at least moral conviction.
It is important to present this evidence in
a critical spirit because the Fatherland's
attacks on President Wilson have at times
verged on insolence; and, if the German
government's money is supporting it.' then
the German gerernment invites condemna
tion for maintaining in a foreign Coun
try its own “reptile press” to wage a jour
uaiistic warfare on a friendly govern
ment. Ibe Fatherland editor, George Syl
vester Viereek. on June 20 last. wrote to
Dr Heinrich F. Albert, known to be the
financial agent of the German government
in the United States, as follower—
Dear Dr Albert ; In thinking rhe matter
ever I do not think that Mr, R. would
be the proper intermediary, inasmuch as
she dmrs not attend to her financial-affairs
herself. If it must be a womat Mrs G
our fri€nd ' Mr " L.. woulS
be far better.
However, personally. I see no reason
■why this payment could not be mid every
month through Mr Meyer, just
other payments If there is any objection
to that. I would suggest that the mo
ments be made to my personal friend and
lawyer, Ely Simpson, whose standing as
my legal adviser would exempt him from
any possible inquiry.
As I have already received $250 this
month, I inclose a statement for SlVrt
pleaKP °' K - «>i». ind
I shall then send my secretary f or
cnsh? I nm sending this Jotter bv bov •«
for obvious reasons J do not wish it to
through the mails. With best regards ,in
cerely yours
The letter was signed in autograph by |
Viereck and the World has printed it. I
There is no reason to doubt the letter*
authenticity. The editor of the Fatherland
who vociferously pretends to be running a
“patriotic” American paper, was Kecking
therein to arrange for secret monthly paj .
ments from the financial agent of the Ger
man government. The answer to this let
ter by Dr Albert, the World prints as f o |.
low*:—
New York. July 1. 3915
Dear Mr Viereck : Your account regardinv
the slsoo—bonus, after deducting the $250
received —for the month of June 13. ha*
been received.
I hope, in the counts of the next week
to be able to make payment. In the mean
time I request the proposal of a suitable
person who can ascertain accurately and
prove the financial condition of your paper
From the moment when we guarantee a reg
ular advance. I must:—
1. Heve a new statement of the condition
of your paper.
2 Practice a control over the financial
management.
In addition to this, we must have an un
derstanding regarding th» course in politics
which you will purawe. which we have not.
asked heretofore. Perhaps you will be so
kind as to talk the matter over, on the basis
of this letter, with Mr Fuehr. Your de
voted.
The original of this answer to Editor
Viereck was typewritten, in German on pa-,
per with no printed or engraved letterhead.,
and was unsigned. The fact that there was
.no signature must arouse the suspicion that
the omission was intentional in order that
the writer might cover his tracks. On the
other hand. Dr Albert is now able to say,
if he desires, that the letter was not written
by him. The question whether this corre
spondence proves that the German govern
ment is maintaining the Fatherland must
be left to each reader's judgment of the evi
dence and the circumstances. It may be
added that since these letters were alleged
to have been written, the Fatherland has
announced, in its issue of August 11. that it
would "take an active part in the presiden
‘tial and congressional campaign of 1916.”
Such participation in our politics as is now
promised by this publication renders very
important the question whether it gets
its support from Berlin.
That the agitation against the export
of war supplies was secretly fostered by
agents of the German government has
been believed for months. The World
prints a confidential report to Dr Albert
on this subject prepared by P. Reiswitz,
dated Chicago. July 22. The reproduc
tion of this document in the World shows
that the original was written in German
and that the autograph signature of Mr
Reiswitz is appended. It contains a mass
of information as to the "inner organiza
‘ation" of the "popular movement”
against munitions shipments. One or two
paragraphs seem particularly illuminat
ing:—
For your confidential information I
would further inform you that the leader
ship of the movement thus far lies in the
hands of two gentlemen ione in Detroit
and one in Chicago) who are firmly re
solved to work toward the end that the
German community, which, of course, will
be with us without further urging, shall,
above all things, remain in the back
ground, and that the movement, to all
outward appearances, shall have a purely
American character. . . .
For the purposes of the inner organiza
tion. to which we attribute particular im
portance, we have assured ourselves of
the co-operation of the local democratic
boss. Roger C. Sullivan. . . . Srillivan
, . . is a deadly enemy of Wilson, as the
latter did not keep his word to make him
a senator; therefore, principally, the sym
pathy for our cause. ...
I must refrain from communicating the
above facts in my report to the embas
sador (Count von Bernstorff) as the mat
ter could be too easily compromised there
by. Perhaps you will find an opportunity
to inform Count von Bernstorff verb
ally. . . .
These are but two of. the specific mat
ters which are involved in German activ
ities in the United States to-day. Pre
sumably additional information will be ac
cessible in the future and final judgment,
may, perhaps, be wisely suspended. The
question must arise, within what limits
should a pro-German propaganda in the
United States be confined? Thus far. -the
American government and people have
been most liberal in not merely tolerat
ing but welcoming a presentation of the
German case and in listening to the Ger
man appeal for sympathy. But if the
German government, through its embas
sador or agents, is financing insolent press
campaigns on our own soil, in opposition
to the policies of the United States gov
ernment, and fostering popular agitations
to undermine the president of this coun
try among his own people, there will be
cause for resentment among all loyal and
true Americans.
BLACK RECORD IN A WHITE BOOK
Wide circulation is being given through
the mails to the recent German white
book to which has been given the title
"The Belgian People's War; a violation of
■international law.” Apparently the Ger
man government realizes that Belgium is
the weak spot and has done all it could
to propitiate neutral criticism: a previous
pamphlet widely distributed in the same
way gave facsimile reproductions of the
documents relied on to prove that Bel
gium had forfeited neutrality by collab
orating with England in arrangements
for defense. That made little impression
because the documents found in the Bel
gian archives so plainly referred to the
precise thing which has come to pass—
the violation, namely, of Belgian neutral
ity by Germany.
For a like reason it may be doubted
whether any greater effect will be pro
duced by the broadcasting of the pamphlet
defending the conduct of the German army
in Belgium. In military operations it may
be true that to attack is the best defense:
in moral questions this is not always the
case. There is something peculiarly irri
tating to fair-minded readers in the habit
ual policy of Germany in trying to shift
the blame to its victims. In the very title
accusing the Belgium* of “a violation of
‘international law” there is absurdity as
well as an unpleasant cynicism. What
were the German troops doing in Bel
gium? They got there only by a previous
violation of international law. Chancel
lor von Bethmann-Hollweg himself has
said it: “Gentlemen, we are in a state
'of necessity, and necessity knows no law.
‘Our troops have invaded .Luxemburg and
‘perhaps are already on Belgian soil.
“That ia contrary to the dictates of inter
national law.”
If the Belgians in taking up arms
against the invader also violated inter
national. law it would help little for the
pot to call the kettle black. But as a
matter of fact there no P r<K>f of • ueh
an infraction on the part of Belgium. In
tsrnational law concerns governments; it
i* not shown, and cannot be credited that
the Belgian government ordered the acts
on the part of the civilian population of
which Germany .makes complaint. Such
participation has been explicitly denied
by >he Belgian government: the German
white book charges that the populace
waz not controled by it* government, but
the neutral will reflect that the govern
ment ad Ma hand* full because of a
treacherooß and unlawful invasion by a
foreign army.
Americas, to tell the truth, are not
very greatly Interested in allegations that
Belgian 'rHians resorted to arms in de
fense of ffieir native land. That is what
our minute men did at Lexington It i»
also wh*t German population did
in Napoleon’t day and would probably do
again if then, were' occasion. In such
unorganized nrfwl there are sure to be
atroritie*. paniettlaWy wbW» an army
mores through n dcnzely populated land
^xe Belgium. Among the civilians resort-
THE SPRINGFIELD WEEKLY REPUBLICAN: THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 1915
ing to arms will be individuals, depraved
by nature or insane with rage, who will
do hideous things. They have to be dealt
with, and the test of an army lies in the
way in which the situation is met.
What Americans friendly to Germany
would have liked to hear was that the
terrible stories which came from Belgium
a year ago were false or at any rate ex
aggerated beyond recognition. On the
contrary, accumulating evidence has put
it beyond doubt that they were substan
tially true. The details may have been
false, but the picture they conveyed was
correct. The German government writes
down its own condemnation when it says
in this white book: "Persons who by fight
ing opposed, the German troops had to
te killed, prisoners could not be treated
as prisoners of war in accordance with
the laws of war, but only as assassins-
In all this, however, the formalities of
jurisdictiop, were .observed so far as mili
tary necessity permitted; the prisoners,
whenever circumstances allowed of such
a course, were shot only after due exam
ination, or after adjudication by a court
martial. Old men, women, and children,
even when under grave suspicion, were
spared to the largest possible extent”
It is pitiful to see a great and civilized
nation forced to make so shameful a con
fession.
It has lately been charitably explained
from a friendly source that the atrocious
conduct of the German army in Belgium
was due to panic, that resistance had not
been looked for. that England's participa
tion in the war was an unwelcome sur
prise. and that there was fear that the
carefully planned time-table might be dis
arranged, making it impossible to over
whelm the French army by the foul blow
through Belgium which was then deemed
indispensable for success. Hence the un
sparing cruelty to the Belgian people,
which had to .be terrified as promptly as
possible in order to clear the way. As a
military measure it failed because of the
Consummate strategy of Joffre, and on the
political side its ill effects have been
frankly, lamented in Germany: in neutral
Holland, which has had the truth at first
hand from Belgian refugees, feeling is
quite as bitter as in the United States.
No white book can mend matters by de
nouncing “the dishonest fight which a
‘civilian population waged against Ger
'man soldiers,"
MR LODGE ON THE RIGHT TRACK
Senator Lodge's speech at Lake Quin
sigamond, Saturday, contained but one
serious omission. It was very fitting, and
so convincing 1 for him to say that if Mr
McKinley or Mr Roosevelt were president
during this period, “there never would
‘have been a Lusitania incident.” One
can understand why Mr Lodge should
think that, as well as say it. With Mc-
Kinley or Roosevelt in the White House,
Admiral von Tirpitz would not have dared
to inaugurate the submarine campaign for
fear of the terrible consequences incident
to being held personally responsible by the
■Washington government.
But it is nOt easy to understand why
Mr Lodge did not also say, what he un
doubtedly believes, that if a republican
president had been in office no war what
ever in Europe would have been possible.
Europe has a way of asking, “Who is
■president of the United States?” before
going to war. If a republican president is
in power, the fighting alliances take
precious good care to keep the peace.
Strange it is that so few Americans have
hitherto recognized this fact. In omitting
to mention it. along with his assertion
that the torpedoing of the Lusitania with
the loss of 1006 lives, was due to a demo
cratic president Mr Lodge marred a
speech of mneh merit-
Mr Lodge is trying to redeem Massachu
setts. He is on the right track.
COTTON AS CONTRABAND
The present agitation in England in
favor of placing cotton on the list of con
traband would appeal more strongly to
America if it avowedly contemplated also
the abandonment of the order in council
and a return to the generally recognized
rules of international law affecting all
neutral and enemy commerce. Probably
that would be the ultimate effect of a
special order making cottoa contraband,
for the exclusion of so important an
article from the operation of the order in
council would seriously weaken the present
embargo policy of Great Britain in deal
ing with the problem of neutral trade.
One gathers from the comments of the
London Chronicle that the order in coun
cil is regarded by that influential liberal
journal as a failure in its effect, particular
ly on America. Instead of relying upon a
blockade open to the American criticism of
illegality, it declares, the government
would have done better to include cotton
and some other commodities in the list of
contraband and depend upon the doctrine
of the continuous voyage to stop goods
consigned ostensibly to a neutral but real
ly intended for an enemy destination.
“Harsh legality,” says the Chronicle, “is
more tolerable to some minds than mild
'illegality. Our object is to prevent cotton
‘going to Germany. As that can be done
•effectively by declaring cotton contraband,
supplemented by the principle of con
‘tinuous voyage, the government's course
'is clear.”
There are several reasons why America
would probably view with considerable
toleration the change of policy now urged
by the Chronicle. In the earlier period of
the war. before the order in council was
issued, there would hare been a very
strong protest in this country against plac
ing cotton on the contraband lint. Great
Britain had regarded the irtaple as non
contraband. even protesting strongly
against Russia's attempt to make it sub
ject to seizure as late as the Russo
Japanese war. Our own government had
listed it as noncontraband in the Spanish
war of 1898. The declaration of London
had placed it, finally, among noncontra
band articles of commerce and that was
us recent as 1909. It is primarily in the
interest of the United States to have cot
ton classed among innocent shipments
owing to our enormous annual exports of
the crop; once it becomes a contraband
article in a great war with America's
avowed or tacit acquescience, it will be
contraband in future wars. But these im
portant commercial considerations must be
weighed against present facts.
Strictly speaking, eotton should be
classed as conditional rather than as abso
lute contraband, inasmuch as its possible
textile uses for nonbelligerent purposes
even in countries at war are enormous;
yet the raw material has of late become
increasingly necessary in the manufacture
of high explosive shells. Sir William Ram
say insists that while substitutes for cot
ton could be used in making nitrocellulose,
none of them had what was called the
"ballistic power” of cotton, and if anything
else were used by the Germans it would
necessitate enlarging the chambers of their
guns and altering the sights of their rifles
—an expedient which not even Germany
could be prepared to adopt in the course
of a great war. Whatever difference of
expert opinion may exist on this point,
there is no doubt that cotton is now ex
tensively used in the making of shells and
that its new importance in war would jus
tify its removal from the noncontraband
classification. ’
In view of the difficult complications
caused by the British order in council, the
American people and government would
now be likely to regard with considerable
relief, possibly, the listing of cotton as
conditional contraband if such action sig
nified the abandonment of the present
blockade. The legal power of the British
government to make cotton contraband is
incontestable; for each belligerent may
make up a contraband list as it pleases.
Germany has classified flax as contraband;
Great Britain may take the same action as
to cotton. And, as the Ixmdon Chronicle
points out, as much cotton could be kept
ont of Germany by the strictly legal meth
od of the seizure of contraband supplement
ed by the principle of the continuous voy
age as is kept out to-day. The legality of
the method would stop at once American
criticism and diplomatic protests now di
rected against the extralegal order in coun
cil; for it is indeed true that "harsh legali
'ty” is far preferable to "mild illegality."
Our position has not seemed to be thor
oughly appreciated by British statesmen
and publicists. America, as an honestly
neutral power, desires no favors from
any belligerent. It has its obligations and
its rights; it proposes to fulfil the one and
it must demand the observance of the
other. The situation is such that a so
called benevolent neutrality in favor of
either side is practically impossible: with
Our population so varied in racial origin,
it is imperative that the government should
demonstrate its sincerity in maintaining
a neutral attitude by holding Great Brit
ain to as strict an account as Germany,
when this country's rights under inter
national law are invaded or set aside.
“Mild illegality” has no attractions to a
neutral state whose policy must be as
even-handed as possible as between bel
ligerents, if for no other reason than that
domestic conditions compel it to "play no
‘fa vorites.”
The British order in council was a reply,
as a measure of retaliation, to the Ger
man submarine warfare on merchant ship
ping. If the placing of cotton on the
contraband list were to involve the aban
donment of the order in council. Germany
might then be in a position to bring her
submarine policy back within the bounds
of lawful warfare without seeming to
wound the pride of the German people.
The settlement thus effected might relieve
the United States of a menace to its peace
which every American feels as a per
sonal burden to-day.
GERMANY'S AFRICAN AMBITIONS
Among the stipulations in the suggested
peace terms which Russia has refused and
Germany has disowned is the restoration of
Egypt to the Turkish empire. This is log
ical ; it would both replace British by Ger
man rule in Egypt and the Sudan, and
destroy what German strategists call the
keystone of the British empire,—the short
road to the Indie*. With Egypt goes
the Suez canal, and the Turkish alliance
has been dear to German imperialists be
cause only through Turkey could they strike
at the canal and thus at British sea power.
Thus while one by one Germany's weakly
held colonies have been falling into enemy
hands, it is still hoped that a German vic
tory in Europe will not merely restore the
possessions lost, but win for Germany a
magnificent new empire. In the offer of
terms to Russia the principal motive,
aside from simplifying the military prob
lem, was to leave Germans free to attack
with full strength those powers at whose
expense the Turco-German empire is to
be created. Of Russia nothing need be de
manded save a free hand in Egypt, and to
achieve this it would be well worth while
to promise Russia the free exit from the
Black sea which ha* been one of the princi
pal goals of Russian ambition.
For the time being, at least, German and
Russian imperial ambitions need not con
flict, because after much study and delibera
tion Africa has been chosen for the main
field of German empire. For years before
the war the drift had been in this direction.
The exploitation of Asia Minor got more at
tention. but this was commercial exploita
tion within the allied empire of Turkey
which it was German policy to support and
turn to account. It would constitute, so
to speak, the bridge by which to advance
for the conquest of Africa. A German vic
tory in the principal war would leave a
mighty central power, Austro-Turko-Ger
man, extending from Antwerp and Berlin
to Bagdad and Cairo, from which indefinite
expansion would be feasible, and various
things have come to light showing what
form imperial ambition has been taking.
With the recent Belgian gray book charg
ing that not long before the war the Ger
man foreign secretary was plotting the
seizure of Belgium’s Congo state may be
put the interesting account of Germany’s
African ambition* lately given by Paul
Rohrbach, who was in the heart of Africa
in the early days of the war, and has now
returned to Berlin. He reveals secret de
signs which put a new color on Agadir and
the resulting bargain. It was never in
tended. he says, to try to get part of Moroc
ao; that was used merely as a basis for de
manding compensation*. This the German
people did not understand and there was
much disappointment at the acceptance of
New Kamerun, especially after a survey
had emphasized it* unfitness for habita
tion. But Rohrbach explains that it should
not be looked upon as an exchange, and in
acquiring it Germany had gained its princi
pal end. by reaching the navigable part of
the Congo. "It was the first step," says a
Berlin writer in summarizing Rohrbach's
statement, “toward' a connection between
'German East and West Africa and Kame
‘run. Only the Belgian Congo and Angola
'were now in the wag-”
This great African empire was Ue design
of the late Klderlen-Waechter, and its pro
motion was the real motive for the Agadir
incident which nearly precipitated the great
war in 1911. Aside from such perilous
expedients the scheme was legitimate and
statesmanlike, and until the war Rohrbach
had hopes that it might be peacefully real
ized. Whatever inay have been the nature
of Jagow’s tentative negotiations concern
ing the Congo, we may believe that Rohr
bach is sincere when he says that it was ex
pected that Belgium would tire of its
colonial burden and be willing to sell what
King Leopold’s far-sighted enterprise had
acquired. It has been tolerably well known.
toO, that an understanding with England
had been reached as to the Portuguese col
ony of Angola, the other connecting link,
and for purposes of colonization preferable
to the Congo. A treaty securing to Ger
many the succession if Portugal should
surrender its territories was about to be
signed when war broke out, and only a few
months before a German commission, aid
ed by Portuguese officials, had gone to seek
a line of railway communication between
Angola and German Southwest Africa.
If these plans had been peacefully real
ized. as the temper of England gave reason
to hope, Germany would have had an im
mense and well-knit African empire. Rohr
bach hopes that the war will make its im
mediate realization possible, but for that
an overwhelming military success is essen
tial, Even to return the colonies seized
would be difficult for England, because they
were conquered by colonials who vindicated
their loyalty in taking up arms for the em
pire. But the hopes of some German im
perialists go .far, beyond this, and take in
Egypt, the Sudan and much of French and
Italian Nprth Africa. Here lies the chief
colonial stake for which the powers are now
contending, and it can be seen that Ger
many could well afford to make Russia
generous terms of peace.
THE FEAR OF SOCIALISM
■Conservative as is the New York consti
tutional convention, it has no. possible
use for William Barnes's peculiar kind
of bourbonism. After a day’s debate on
Mr Barnes's amendment prohibiting the
Legislature from passing minimum wage,
old-age pension and similar “socialistic"
laws, the amendment is regarded as hope
lessly beaten. The finishing blows came
from such delegates as Mr Wickersham
and President Schurman of Cornell uni
versity, whose political thinking places
them among moderates instead of rad
icals. Neither would approve Mr Barnes’s
extreme position concerning “class legis
lation;” there are glaring industrial and
social inequalities which occasionally re
quire "class legislation.” At least, the
Legislature of a modern American state
must be left with adequate power to deal
with acute questions of this character as
they arise, or the people will have pre
cious little use for either Legislatures ot
constitutions.
That Mr Barnes represents a large, if
diminishing, body of public opinion may
be taken for granted. If a measure is
"socialistic” that is. enough to condemn
it in the view of these people. In advo
cating bis amendment against all social.
welfare legislation Mr Barnes of course
.denoutpq^ socialism and rebutted the ar
gument th^t socialistic legislation, so
called, is a check to. the growth of so
cialism. He was very sure that such laws
prepare the mind for socialism and accel
erate its approach. On that point one can
not be controversial without waste of
time, since what is asserted is merely a
matter of individual opinion; yet Mr
Barnes was perhaps unfortunate in his
illustrations. He reminded the conven
tion that in laying the foundation of the
modern social legislation for the benefit
of the wage-earners of Germany. Bis
marck maintained that such laws would
stop the progress of socialism in the em
pire. One is now tempted to inquire if
the present war has not vindicated Bis
marck's judgment.
Great Britain had already begun to ac
cept social legislation for workingmen on
the German lines when the world crash
came a year ago Old age pensions, un
employment and invalid insurance, the
minimum wage and the like had been in
troduced under the liberal government, and
there are many observers who believe that
there would be a far more patriotic and
loyal working class in Great Britain to- !
day if these reforms had been inaugurated
as early as they were in Germany. Severe
crises like the present war search out the
weak places in a social and industrial or
ganization. English individualism had
been dominant for generations and coin
cidently with the amassing of enormous
wealth through manufacturing and com
merce there had developed in English
cities and towns the most hopeless pov
erty to be seen in western Europe. The
cleavage between the aristocracy and
higher middle class on the one: side and
the wage-earners on the other was made
conspicuous by the progress of an aggres
sive trade unionism and the development
of a labor party in-politics. And what
these forces have been capable of in the
midst of an international conflict threat
ening the existence of the British empire
was seen in the recent strike- of miners
in the Welsh coal fields. ~ .
If Bismarck were alive, he would probably
assert that the almost complete submission
of the German socialist party to the forces
of imperialism to-day, no less than the uni-:
versal loyalty of the working class to the
government in its time of need, is the result
of the social legislation which he began-a
generation ago. German socialism has not
proved an internal danger to the empire in
the present supreme.crisis. Its leaders un
doubtedly have their own explanations of
this fact; they would resent the charge
that an aristocratic, patcrnalisticimperial
ism had turned to its own purposes the en
tire social democratic movement, But-the
facts speak for themselves. For the time
being, at least, democratic socialism has
disappeared while German militarism oc
cupies the field and expends the whole ener
gy of the people in military conquest It
may be that Bismarck did check socialism
by his social legislation designed to improve
the conditions under which wage-earners
lived and worked. It was paternalistic to
a high degree, yet it was evidently adapted
to the German mind and the German con
ception of -the relation between the individ
ual and the state.
America is so different from any Euro
pean country that comparisons such pi
Mr Barnes suggested in tbm.New York
constitutional convention may bo unprofita-
ble if not misleading. Of one thing, how
ever, no doubt should remain. That is the
wisdom of doing what seems best under
existing conditions, regardless of the al
leged peril of being drawn inexorably into
remote catastrophes conceived of as logical
ly inevitable. Bismarck was hot frightened
away from his program of betterment for
the working class by the cry of socialism.
Here in America the state Legislatures
and Congress may safely be left with pow
er to adopt such social legislation as the
times seem to require.
MASSACHUSETTS TAX DODGERS
The mere publication of stories about
millionaire tax dodgers in this common
weath accomplishes nothing toward the
reform of the system of taxation- There
is, however, an application to be made
that has real value in connection with the
vote next autumn on the constitutional
amendment broadening the Legislature’s
powers in framing tax laws.
It should be explained why the late
Gov Draper of Hopedale was taxed by
the local assessors for only about $1,000,-
<X>O, when his personal property amounted
to over $6,000,000. It should be explained
why Sidney Winslow of the United shoe
machinery company has made his legal
residence in the small town of Orleans, on
Cape Cod. Orleans had a tax rate of sls
on a thousand in 1910. Now the tax rate
is $3; and it is said that the tax Mr Win
slow pays is more than the town requires.
These scandalous stunts in tax dodging
will continue to disfigure the Massachu
setts tax system so long as the present
general property tax can be levied so as
to take very often 50 per cent of the tax
payer's income. Tax dodging is reprehen
sible, but there are hundreds, and even
thousands, of Massachusetts taxpayers
who feel that they are outrageously treat
ed when their "intangibles” in property
are made to yield to the tax gatherer
something like one-half of the annual in
come produced by them. It isn't the mil
lionaire only who revolts against the pres
ent system; every small holder of stocks
and bonds taxable in Massachusetts is
made to sympathize with the rich tax
dodgers and to conceal so far as possible
their own taxable securities from the as
sessors.
The way to reform on sensible lines is
through the amendment of the constitu
tion so that an utterly outworn system,
established in the ISth century, may be
recast on modern lines. The voting booth
in November will afford the voters an up
portunity to begin a real work of regenera
tion.
THE PROMISE OF THE CROPS
Massachusetts, as an agricultural factor,
is a mere patch—and a very small one,
too —on the map of the United States, but
it is our particular patch, and if it is not to
share abundantly in the general produc
tivity and prosperity of the country's agri
culture this year there is something to be
sorry for. The secretary of the state board
of agriculture finds that the rains of the
past six weeks have done a vast amount of
damage in the commonwealth. There will
be almost no Massachusetts potatoes this
year. The present outlook for our Con
necticut valley onions and tobacco is "dis
’couraging.” Rain, rain, rain, the everlast
ing rain the past month, with occasional
hailstorms, has played the mischief. Our
small hay crop, however, was determined
by the lack of moisture in the spring. The
local experience has been excessive dryness
at one stage and excessive wetness at a
later stage, with results far from exhil
arating.
Yet the government’s August crop report
for the entire country is wonderfully prom
ising. If Massachusetts has only half a
normal hay crop, the estimated hay ton
nage for the United States exceeds last
year’s actual crop by 5,000,000. In the
trans-Mississrppi region, along the lines
of the Union Pacific railroad, for example,
the yield of hay is very heavy. If Massa
chusetts potatoes are ruined in the fields,
the total potato yield in the nation prom
ises to be 431,000,000 bushels, as compared
with 406.000,000 last year. If Connecticut
valley tobacco has been hard hit by the
swift, pelting summer storms, there are
still 1,083,000.000 pounds of tobacco in
sight in the United States, as compared
with the final crop of 1,035.000.000 pounds
a year ago. For the consumer here in New
, England, consequently, the local crop sit
uation is no great disaster, in view of the
general abundance of yield, although the
misfortunes of local agriculture invariably
are felt in the business of the section as a
whole.
In many ways it is an extraordinary crop
year. War prices for the leading grains
led to the planting of 10,000.000 more
acres in the United States to wheat, corn
and oats than ever before. The increase
.in the acreage of winter wheat was 12%
per cent; in spring wheat 10 per cent.
Much more corn was planted in the South
than usual because the cotton acreage was
much reduced on account of the diffi
culty in marketing cotton in certain Euro
pean countries at war. All these condi
tions of acreage were unusual when the
growing season opened; then what hap
pened? Weather conditions proved topsy
turvy. Winter wheat got a fine start,
promising the greatest yield ever known,
larger even than the 684.000,000 bushels of
1014. But excessive rains struck the win
ter wheat belt when harvesting began and
caused deterioration. The August 1 pros
pect was for 650,000,000 bushels. Ordi
narily, winter wheat and spring wheat do
not yield very abundantly in the same
year, for the warm, dry weather that
ripens winter wheat into a huge crop
catches spring wheat when it is yotiug and
tender and dries it up. But this season
the wet weather which has so delayed
winter wheat harvesting has been ideal for
spring wheat, with the estimated result
that the total wheat yield for the year
will approximate a billion bushels, the
largest ever raised in any country.
Corn began poorly in the spring, for
the West had a cold, late planting season,
although the corn acreage was somewhat
increased. But the wet Julv has made
corn grow *0 that on August 1 it promised
a yield of 2,918,000,060 bushels, a* com
pared with 2.613,000,000 a year ago. In
Jqly alone the estimated corn yield in
creased 100.000.000 bushels. If the present
month of August will bring two or three
warm, sunny weeks to ripen the crop, it
is not impossible even now that the erop
-that began so ;poor)y will fill the bins of
the country to the amount of 3,000,000.060
of bushels; and the record crop was 3,125,-
000,000 bushels in 1912. The corn crop
is the most valuable single crop we have
in America. In 1912 the hnge crop of
corn alone lifted the United States out
of a considerable business depression. Corn
ds to a large degree a forage crop and in
its abundance it always means cheaper
food for live stock.
A feature of this year's agricultural pro
duction hitherto but little noted is the
welcome stimulus afforded to the Ameri
can live stock industry. On this point the
special report of a committee of the cham
ber of commerce of the United States
says: “The raising of live stock is a grow
ing industry in all sections of the eouu
‘try. From the South come reports Of in
'creasing numbers of animals. The great
ly increased raising in all sections this
‘year of grain and forage crops point* to
‘a large number of cattie. Hogs are m
‘creasing in numbers because of abundant
‘feed. In every section of the country,
‘without exception, the dairy industry is
'spoken of as a growing one.” The sup
ply is striving to meet the demand, accord
ing to immutable economic laws; but of
vast aid to live stock interests this sum
mer have been these country-wide rains.
The luxuriant grass and alfalfa on the
western plains and in the Rocky moun
tain region are making feed for cattle just
as in New England the rain-soaked fields
with their fresh feed for cows are helping
the dairy interests. These new crops as
a whole will add billions of dollars to the'
country’s wealth and furnish the solid
basis of its economic strength in the Criti
cal months to come.
THE WESTERN RATE DECISION
The western railroads, that is to sty
the railroads west of Chicago, are natu
rally disappointed in the decision of the
interstate commerce commission on their
joint petition for certain increases in
freight rates. They did not ask for a
horizontal increase, as the eastern rail
roads did when they asked for a raise of
5 per cent all along the line: it was an
increase on this commodity, an in
crease on that commodity, and so on
through a considerable list of article* of
commerce, that the commission was asked
to grant.
Some of these specific requests have .
been granted; the railroads have not been
sent away empty-handed and to that ex
tent at least the railroads may feel en
couraged. The public has not the techni
cal knowledge required to judge Of the
fairness of the commission’s decision in re
gard to specific rates, but it does know
that the commission has granted increased
rates to the eastern railroads and also to
the express companies within the past
year, showing convincingly that it was not
so hopelessly antagonistic to the com
panies in its policies as has often been
maintained by the commission's critics.
Two of the members of the commission,
Messrs Harlan and Daniels, desired con
cessions to the railroads on all the rates
in question and it is very possible that
their minority views should have pre
vailed. The majority, however, appear to
have been impressed with the argument
that several of the western railroads that
joined in the petition for increased freight
rates had been financially prostrated by
vicious management rather than by un
remunerative charges for transportation.
When such railroad corporations as the
Rock Island, the Frisco and the Missouri
Pacific, whose misfortunes are due fully
as much to reckless or shortsighted man
agement as to low rates, ask for relief
through heavier charges on traffic, what
principle should control the decision of
the commission?
The answer would not be difficult if it
were possible to say how far to blame for
deficits was bad management and how far
to blame was the rate for commodities
carried. Commissioners Harlan and Dan
iels seem correct in principle in holding
that improper financial methods should
not debar the roads from receiving reason
able rates for service; but. on the other
hand, what would be a reasonable rate
in the case of those corporations when
honestly and properly managed? It is un
fortunate that vicious financial methods in
the case of certain railroads should have
confused the scientific question of rate
miking in that section.
“CREATIVE” JUSTICE
An ingenious effort is made by a young
American writer to provide a basis foi
neutrality in a distinction between “static’
and kinetic, or as he calls it, “creative'
justice. Germany and the allies, he at'
gues, are both in the right; the allies have
ample territories and wont things to stay
as they are; Germany Is land hungry and
wants a new deal. This is simple ant
comprehensible, but the conversion intt
rival ethical systems, both sound yet it
conflict is a more perilous affair.
That England should ereet the statm
quo into a moral system is natural, foi
England has an old civilization in which
catastrophe has always been averted by
compromise; in every reform respect foi
the old order has tempered the shock. The
status quo has been the condition of
orderly growth. But to call British jus
tice "static” in the sense that it is in
capable of progress is absurd: the devel
opment even within a century is enormous.
On the whole, of course. England is con
servative, both in the temper of its peo
pie and in its interest in the preserve
tion of the status quo.
But can any fair opposition be set up or
the side of Germany? There is danger of
being misled by verbal antithesis. II
England is in most respects conservative,
Germany is in many respects reactionary
Politically and in some social aspects
England 1* a century or more in advance
Even in the state socialism which ha:
done some ultra-modern things in
Germany there is an archaic ele
ment; the problems of progress have
been evaded rather than solved. Ann
while disparity of fortune is not yet sc
serious as in England, where greet wealth
has for over two centuries been accumulat
ing in a limited number of families, it It
rather extravagant to call the device foi
relief of the poor which began in Bi*
marck’s time "creative justice"; a* much
might be said for the food basket* which
old Boman families gave to their poot
clients. Bismarck regarded such meas
ure* a* a sop to make the people tolerate
a status quo founded on blood and iron.
France really did undertake a wild ex
periment in creative justice in 1793, and