Fir?? to Last?the Truth: New??Editorials
M?ber of the Audit Bureau of ClrcviisUcn?
MONDAY, MAY 27, 19?9
Owed S_ publlahed dally by The Tribune Af^t,,0fn'
a, Smm Tcrt Corporation. Ogden Reld. rmMsnt ; O.
Veroor Ras-sm Vl~-Pmldent; Richard H L~.^?? ?
F. A S?Ur. Treasurer. A.Mtw*-. Tribune MOAta?. ,H
Nas.su Street. New Tork. Telephone. Bceknian ,000.
Rt-BSCRirTlON RAT?! -TV Mall ?,?"&<* PaW' ^'
ilde of Greater New Tork:
IV THY UNITED STATES 01 TStDB O? GREATER
I yr. <i mo 8 W>. 1 ?o
Dal* and Sundsy. IJ50 *? " $? -'" ' 60
Pst?y only . J-M ? '.'" 5 .30
Kur.da.v only . " <*n ' -,0
! CANADIAN liATT.P
Pally and Sunday .*1?00 *SJ>? *? ?? ",?o
N?f ealr . >f * ?? ... .r>0
Sunday only .? po *i'**
P?t!, and Sunday.SI4.J0 *? ?Jj* *J ? ** ..<,
Sundty oiilj .-? ' 00 "50
(Btand ?? ?he Pcstofflc?. at Ne? York a? Second ?ClSSI
vetf ran purchais merchandise ^-'"f115'* ';l,lnT"E
TR<aur^E with ?bjolute ?.afety-for II dl?atl?f sollen re
?ults Ir. any ?a?.. THE TRIBUNE gu?rante? to "V>^T
money back upon result. No rad tape. No quibbling.
We make good promptly if the advsrtlter ?loe? not.
MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
? ? n.5r,cl?!M Prats is exclusively entitled to ?*" usi
fo* republicanos of all news dispatches credited to It or
l!?| other*!--? credited In this p?r>er and also the lota!
ie?? of tporitar.rous origin, published herein.
AH rights of rspubllcatloii o? all other matter herein
are alto reserved.
An Airplane Tale.
Although innocent aircrafters were
lynch??!, as wc. know, 'and as nearly
everybody else now believes, it is per?
haps only fair to say that the lynchers,
too, may have been honest. Some of
them undoubtedly were We never
treated seriously the Borglum charges
of graft and pro-Germanism against
members of the Aircraft Board, but, on
the other hand, we have never believed
that Borglum himself was a profiteer, as
was later alleged, by some of his victims,
nor that he was governed by gross and
It was an extremely difficult situation
to understand. The Tribune's interest
in it began early. We had ?a letter from
a Signal Corps officer at Dayton begging
us to come quickly and investigate the
greatest scandal the world had ever
' known. A trained reporter was sent
there. After several days he began to
report by telegraph and his messages
were strange. He. thought he was being
watched. He was expecting to be in?
timidated. How far did the office wish
him to go? We instructed him to come
in and report what he had found.
His report was like a "movie" running
backward, with one-third of the pictures
missing and one-third upside down?
interesting and exciting, but inconclu?
sive. He had seen an enormous swamp
converted into a flying field, a million
dollar warehouse a mile from any rail?
road, furniture that looked like ma?
hogany in tiny officers' quarters, and
proofs that men in uniform had traded
with themselves as civilians.
It was very vague. We couldn't make
much of it and had put it aside, when
we began to hear from eminent citizens
of Dayton. They had heard that we
were investigating the aviation business.
They knew everybody connected with it,
and it was all sweet and clean, and
would we promise?if it was not going
beyond the line of ethics?that nothing
should be printed until the accused had
a chance to speak for themselves? We
assured them that in making this re?
quest no ethical rule was fractured, but
that, in view of the anxiety of their
eminent friend3, we felt obliged to renew
an investigation which we had been al?
most minded to abandon.
Thereupon we engaged a special in?
vestigator, James Arthur Seavey, a "New
York Sun" reporter cf the old school, and
sent him off to Dayton. The aircrafters
showed him anything he asked to see.
In due time he returned and wrote a
fascinating story of confusion, of reck?
less waste, of extravagant mistakes, of
fantastic beginnings and interlocking
relationships. Dayton appeared to him
to be owned entirely by a few men who
managed everything, including the air?
craft business, and who were too busy
to stop for a minute while they changed
from civilian to military clothes, so that
you could fairly establish the case of a
man serving for a brief period both the
government's business and his own. It
was a story which, with a little more
emphasis here and the omission of some
trivial qualifications there, would have
created a grand sensation.'
But we said: "You have not proved
that the government has actually been
'I can't prove it," he answered.
"Do you believe it?" we asked him.
*'No," he replied; "I can't say that I
believe the government has really been
B '? The story was never printed. Our
W opinion about it was this: You could
not found any business on a scale of un?
precedented magnitude in precipitate
haste without apparent shocking waste
Add the fact that the business to be'
founded was itself entirely strange, and
you have to grant in all fairness' that
everything really proved might have
happened honestly. Therefore, as no
graft could be directly alleged, it seemed
gratuitous to cast opprobrium upon a
vital undertaking by printing a story
which to the undiscriminating mind
would certainly suggest enormous profil
So much for that. Next we began to
hear from Borglum. He had been com?
missioned by the President to investigate
the aircraft muddle. Now, fancy a
sculptor walking about in that situation!
(?utzon Borglum does know mechanical
things. He knows a lot about an air?
plane, and how it must be not just an
engine and a frame and then wings and
propeller* added, but a perfect and beau?
tiful synchronization of all of tfiose
things, inspired by the very soul of j
rhythm. That he knows. But he knows j
much less about business, about ihc in- j
terpretation of industrial processes
which under normal conditions often will
entail amazing experimental waste,
about finance, or about the. economy of
reckless extravagance where time is an I
important factor. He saw al! the things ,
our investigators had seen, and probably
more in like character, and then he com- !
munteated with us, and we turned over
to him all of our materia!, with notice
why we had made no use of it.
He used to come often to the Wash?
ington Bureau of The Tribune to tele?
graph us for the loan of our Mr. ?Seavey
or for more of our material, and when
he went out we would hear that a Secret
?Service man bad immediately appeared,
asking, in theatrical whisper?, "Was that
He agreed with us that it would be
unwise and unpatriotic to give the mat?
ter publicity just then, or until graft
could be positively proved, and then, just
as our first reporter did on his return
from Dayton, he wrote a confidential re?
port for the President, stating bis suspi?
cions freely, but not pretending to have
Greatly to our amazement, and. we be?
lieve, to -the utter surprise of Borglurn ?
abo, that report was made public j
through the War Department. By this ?
act the aircrafters, without any hearing, !
were lynched in public opinion.
The Tribune immediately protested j
against what seemed to it to be an out- i
rage upon the reputations of men against ?
whom nothing dishonest or disloyal had ;
been established by evidence; and we
proceeded to make another and mora j
comprehensive investigation. We found i
that the Liberty motor, but for two de
fects which wei'e easily cured, had at |
last come through. Even Borglurn con- i
ceded that achievement. We found that |
the conditions of quantity production
had been created. We found that the
knot had been cut between, on the one j
side, the manufacturers, who bad been ;
receiving hundreds of changes, and, on i
the other side, a lot of aviation experts,
technicians, engineers and theorists, who
had been trying to attain an unattain- i
able perfection. We found that most of |
the vital problems had been solved, and i
that, m short, the aircraft situation w;?.s '
rapidly clearing up just at the moment !
when, by the irony of events, a storm of |
suspicious indignation broke on the
heads of the harassed and rueful air- j
The last thing The Tribune did was to i
send Mr. Knappen out to prove the ;
physical phenomenon of airplanes com?
ing alive and rising out of what only a
few months ago seemed hopeless confu?
sion. We told him to touch them, smell :
them, bite them, count them and ride
in them. He is now reporting.
A Real Victory
The obvious fight, the most important
fight, the one that occupies most of the ?
front page, is the fight against the ene
my's battalions, eye to eye, bayonet to
bayonet. But' this fina'l test can never :
be carried on unless another and less j
conspicuous fight is first won in advance.
That is the fight against apathy, against
stupidity, against provincialism, against
selfishness?against, primarily, igno?
rance, the failure to comprehend, to
imagine, to see.
The superb victory for the Red Cross
is a victory against all these forces of j
obstruction and delay. The hundred ;
millions have come far easier than did |
the first hundred a few months ago
?this despite the Liberty Loan and :
income taxes and all the multiplying
calls of actual war. Partly this is due to !
the excellence of plan and organization,
which relied mainly upon'house-to-house
canvass and utilized the public collec?
tions simply to bestir interest. Chiefly
the fund's overwhelming Auccess is due
to the new awakening of the nation to
its world part.
America understands and sees?and
seeing she gives. The victory is a large
one, a farreaching one. Let us rejoice
in the Hed Cross success, not only for
the huge blessing it bears to our fight?
ing men but for the blazing aign it is
of a nation's will to win.
Mr. Hoover has said nothing new in
! declaring that relief from the present
high prices of milk must come, from re
| duction in distribution cost here. That is
obvious from ' the facts spread on the
records of the various milk investiga?
tions. The milk producers get somewhat
I less than half of what the consumer
i pays. Whether or not the actual money
they receive ought to render them a
profit on scientifically managed farms,
the fact remains that because they re?
ceive so little some of them have gone
! out of business and others have greatly
i reduced their herds. Yet as a business
| proposition it is almost impossible to pay
them more. An increase in their rates
is promptly passed along?with a little
j added?to the consumers, and there
j upon the consumption of milk drops,
' with disastrous results to city babies.
! The middlemen, or distributers, don't
! suffer in percentage of profits; at worst,
they suffer merely in the volume of
; their business.
: . Since the public must drink some milk,
and in view of that article's food value
ought to drink a great deal more than it
does, it is manifest that the state suf?
fers severely through the reduction of
| the number of its cattle. But the limit
j of the average consumer's purchasing
power has been reached with the pre
; vailing high prices. There remains only
! the course which Mr. Hoover has again
j brought to the public's attention?some
i forra of combination of milk distribu
j ters, or elimination of most of them,
j which will do away with the competition
and duplication Of effort responsible for
I their large proportion of the charge
which the consumer pays. This?has been
discussed for years without the formu?
lation of any legal and practical plan
by which it may be accomplished. The
milk distributers might find themselves
within the grasp of both Federal and
state law just as readily for combining ;
to reduce distribution costs as they
might for joining together to hold up
prices. In that respect they are unhap?
pily at a disadvantage when compared
with the dairy fanners, whose associa?
tion has been exempted from the anti?
trust statutes. If the distributing com?
panies parcelled out the city into dis?
tricts within which they would not com?
pete, costs might be brought down, but
they would almost certainly fall foul of
the law, and so far as individual con?
sumers were concerned a monopoly
would be established which would be
practically intolerable. It has been pro?
posed that the city itself establish pas?
teurization and distribution plants, with
a view of reducing distribution charges
by municipal competition; but in the
end, unless the entire distribution service
for the community were taken over,
nothing would be gained save a shifting
of a certain proportion of cost into the
Mr. Hoover seems to think the prob?
lem, may be solved by local initiative.
The local health officials and the Mar?
ket Commissioner are racking their
brains ta find some way to act. Under
-existing laws it is extremely difficult to
see what they can do, with the best
intentions in the world.
Less Than They Deserve
A couple of weeks ago we strongly in?
dorsed a bill introduced in the House of
Representatives by Mr. Mott, of this
state, providing free transportation to
and from the camps for soldiers on fur
lough. Railroad fares now average
about 2% cents a mile. The govern- j
ment is going to raise the average to
over three cents. This is a prohibitive
tax on soldiers who get $30 a month and
are trying to support dependents and
buy Liberty bonds.
Secretary McAdoo has now authorized
a special soldiers' passenger rate of one
cent a mile. That helps. But why not
go the whole distance? The French
have the right idea. With them a fur?
lough is a part of the military routine
?and a highly important part. The
French government furnishes free trans?
portation. Why shouldn't we do the
same? The men who are training to !
fight the country's battles have more I
than earned it.
Unjust to Forrest
In one of his war articles the other
day Major General Maurice, until re?
cently the British government's Director
of Military Operations, now a news?
paper commentator on strategy, made
use of an epigram coined by Lieutenant
General Nathan B. Forrest, the most
extraordinary cavalry leader produced
by our Civil War. General Maurice
It is told of Forrest, the Confederate cav?
alry leader in the American Civil War, that
he was asked by a lady for tho. secret of
his successes in the war, and replied,
"Ma'am, I got there first with the most
The text of the quotation does injus?
tice to Forrest. This great soldier never
spent more than six months inside a
schoolhouse. He remained all his life a
stranger to book learning and talked
what might be called a "cracker" South?
ern dialect. What he really said in an?
swer to the question put him was: "I
got there firstest with the mostest men."
Forrest was a unique and incompara?
bly racy genius. The art of war was
born in him. But he was innocent of all
other arts?unless money making may
be regarded as one. And no one would
have been more amused than he at the
unimpeachably academic form given by
a cultivated British brother-in-arms to
one of his pithiest and most character?
Self-determination should extend to
! small people. Practically every child
! born into the world finds when he
' reaches the age of discretion that ever
so many vital matters have been decided
for him. A name has been set upon
i him. He has been dedicated to the
i Methodist Church. His college has been
j chosen, and he is indeed lucky if his
j entire career, culminating in the Presi
| dency of the nation or the vice-presi
I dency of the Tidewater National Bank,
? has not been mapped out. We must
; admit that the only child we know who
: received the privilege of choosing his
j own name hit upon Themistocles. His
parents had favored Junius Brutus But?
ler, 8d. Not only in his future, but in
I his present life as well, does the child
! find himself restricted. Often his thumbs
j are denied to him by means of safety
pins. H?3 loudest protests do not avail
I to alter his time of rising or going to
! bed, or even the hour of a single meal,
by so much as a minute. He has little
or no choice in the selection of visitors
j and acquaintances. His preferences in
rattles are only slightly heeded. Later
he is not allowed to put pins in his
mouth, or burn himself in the fireplace,
or fall down the stairs. Without restric?
tions he probably would do all these
things. He would suffer, but ne would
learn. He would sit at the feet of that
compelling schoolmaster, Mr. Experience,
and not be bored by the unconvincing
tutelage of Mr. G. Advice.
Nobody ever contended that Mexico
would not and did not fall foul of pins
and fire and stairways when left to shift
for herself. But there were many far
seeing persons who argued that all this
was good for Mexico. For the life of
us we can't conceive why the self-de*ter
mination, which assures a full measure
of happiness to Liberia in spite of mis?
takes, should not work equally well for
little Themistocles Butler.
Ulster Is People
To the Editor of The Tribune.
.Sir: [ hnvp read "Tay Pay's" letter, "The ?
fase of Ireland," in to-day's Tribune, and it :
gives 1 iyrht to several points concern- [
ing the distracted country. But may I ask
if Mr. O'Connor is entirely frank in bo
jauntily dismissing the iJIst.er question as
n "rebellion of a small minority of the
Irish people in Ulster against n majority
of the people of Great Britain as well as
of Ireland"? While it is possible that a
majority of the people of Great Britain are
for Home Rule, I am quilo sure that a
majority could not to be found to agree to
coerce Ulster from separating from Eng?
land against its wish! That puts a very
different, light upon the question. If th?i
Irish people could agree as to what form
of government it wishes, the vexed ques?
tion might, be settled with comparatively
little trouble. England has already given
Ireland free rein to adjust its own difficul?
ties, and Ireland has apparently up to this
moment, failed. I cannot sec whv England
and the English people are to be blamed
Some people claim to find an analogy
between Ulster's behavior and our own re?
calcitrant South, but their mental processes
seem to me confused. If one of the South?
ern states, Virginia, for instance, had re?
fused to join the Confederacy and the North
had forced her to leave the loyal states
and repudiate the Union, then, and only
then, would, we have a parallel to the action
of Clstcr. The south of Ireland, Catholic
Ireland, frankly hates England and every?
thing English. It hates it to such an ex?
tent that it will hurt England precisely at
the time it most needs unity and strength.
It will give it a body blow as the arm of
the Hun is actually uplifted to strike. The
north of Ireland, Protestant Ireland, loves
England and everything English, is success?
ful, thrifty, and undoubtedly shares some?
thing of the traits of the Scotchmen as
well as something of the Irish. Now, why
under Heaven, if a part of Treland is re?
morselessly set against being governed by
another part, must England force the loyal,
English-loving part of the country into the
arms of the disloyal, English-hating part?
Eurtherinore, and this I never can under?
stand, why, if Ireland is so excited about
the rights of the smaller nations, if Ireland
is, as she poses, the doughty champion of
the weaker people, why does she insist upon
imposing her will upon the little county of
Ulster? Granted that Ulster represents but
a small minority of the population of Ire?
land! Is she to be overridden because of
that? I thought Ireland was fighting to
protect the interest of the smaller coun?
tries, striving to protect the rights of the
minority! How can Ireland blame England
for imposing its will upon a conquered
nation when Ireland is trying to do pre?
cisely that upon Ulster, which is not, and
has never been to South Ireland even a
conquer??! county? If the Ulster revolt is
so negligible let Ireland prove it by letting
Ulster go. If Ireland is really so sympa?
thetic toward the feelings of the small
nations, let her give Ulster the right to
stay with England if she prefers to. Or is
it possible that Ireland wishes to impose
taxes upon the one part of Ireland that
has most to be taxed? Is it possible
that Ireland is only talking big about fair?
ness and small peoples, and tyranny and
self-expression and the like, and reallv in?
tends to make Ulster bleed for the benefit
of Ireland's majority?
' ANNIE NATHAN MEYER.
New York, May 23, 1918.
A Fight Against Odds
From- the Mihvaukcc Journal
E MAY justly point with pride to our
oversubscriptions to all the Liberty
loans, to our exceeding our Red
Cross quota, to our generous contributions
for other patriotic purposes. We may point
with especial emphasis to the great num?
ber of volunteer enlistments from our state.
But these things which we have done so
well do not wipe out those other things
in which we have failed. We. may in jus?
tice ask that the good be weighed against
the bad, but it does us no good to attempt
to tamper with the scales. The nation is
looking at those scales. Tampering with
them will even lessen the amount of na?
tional sympathy we now enjoy.
There are black spots in our record. They
stand against us. They hurt us. We can?
not claim to be 100 per cant American so
long as those black spots remain. It is
for us, for us alone, to wipe them out. To
do this is the only way to make our city
and our state known as 100 per cent Ameri?
can. It is our task and it must be done. It
is being done. It is weak to think of im?
One good defence we have. Here, more
vigorously perhaps than in any other sec?
tion of the country, loyalty has had to fight
disloyalty. The mal-assimilated immi?
grants of other years have had to be made
over into Americans. Some of them are
even now alien in heart. States where im?
migration has been no great factor can?
not, realize what this means. It means
work, indt'fatigable work. It means a fight
against odds. The loyal of the state have
made, are making, that fight to the utmost
of their powers. They have made the fight
under very great difficulties. It has taken
courage of a high degree. Here, as nowhere
else, the forces of disloyalty were strong,
active, well organized. Yet Wisconsin has
met all the demands made upon it by the
government. It has shown itself stanchly
true to the nation.
Wisconsin is steadily progressing a
thing to which some states can lav less
legitimate claim. There should be more
joy in the nation over one state honestly
repentant and resolved to he loyal than
over forty-seven states that ne^d no Ameri?
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: At a meeting of the executive com?
mittee of the Talking Machine Men, Inc.,
held to-day, the following resolution was
"That the management of The New
York Tribune be congratulated on the
stand it has taken in the matter of the
?Landay advertising,' as discussed and
criticised in your issue of even date, and
this committee does hereby concur and
pustain the action taken in the matter
and believes that it will be of great bene?
fit to the talking machine trade of New
York and vicinity, and it docs further?
more instruct the secretary to send a
copy of this resolution to The New York
THhune and trade papers, showing the ac?
tion taken at this meeting."
TALKING MACHINE MEN. INC.,
E. G. Rrown, Secretary.
New York, May 23, 1918.
i From the Keokuk Daily Qata City)
As we understand the attitude of the
Finns, lliey would not object to a provi?
sion?! government so long as it provided
The New Death
<f."om 77?e afijcci? Telegraph,
Some day this country is going to surpri:
s ?py to death by shooting him.
'WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?"
Mr. Hearst's Loyalty
From The Literary Digest.
WHEN an ex-President of the
United States says that the
powerful Hearst newspapers
have been ''dangerous to this country"
i and "helpful to Germany," the question
i raised is one of such vital concern to the
; American people as may be judged when
i we are told that more than two-and-a
! half million of them read those papers
; every day. Not only is the Hearst press
j an influence moulding and coloring public
j opinion at this critical time, but the pub
i lie welfare is still more involved when we
! remember that Mr. Hearst himself is
| talked of as a probable nominee for the
! Governorship of New York, and even as
j a candidate for the Presidency. How
seriously this is regarded by one city of
I New York State is seen in the action
i taken, after Colonel Roosevelt's attack,
| by the Mount Vernon Board of Alder
I men, who have voted *to bar "The New
| York American" and "Evening Journal"
from circulation, distribution or sale in
that city for the duration of the war.
Challenged by Postmaster General
i Burleson to make specific his charge that
J the Administration had failed to dis
| cipline "various powerful newspapers
j which opposed the war, or attacked our
! allies, or directly or indirectly aided
! Germany against this country," Colonel
Roosevelt replied that the "prime ex?
ample of failure by the ?administration
to proceed against really hostile and
damaging utterance" was afforded by "a
failure to deal with Mr. Hearst's papers
as it has ? dealt with certain other
papers." The Colonel points out that
the success of the Hearst propaganda
| would have defeated England and France
i and left us to fight Germany alone. ?\s
' quoted in "The New Yoi-k Times" he goes
; on to say:
"At the very beginning of the war
the government proceeded successfully
against Tom Watson's publication in
Georgia. Yet Tom Watson had done
nothing that was anything like as dan?
gerous to this country and our allies and
as helpful to Germany as Mr. Hearst had
"it is interesting to remember that the
Administration had full warning about
Hearst's probable attitude by his previ?
ous editorials attacking Germany's foes
and defending Germany. I have before
me at the moment a copy of 'The New
York American' editorial of June 6, 1915,
signed by Mr. Hearst himself, saying that
we have no right to ask Germany to re?
frain from submarine warfare against the
commerce of her enemies, and that the
Lusitania was an English vessel and was
j properly a spoil of war, and that its de?
struction by the German submarine was
in accordance with the authorized and ac?
cepted rules of warfare.
"After we went into the war, on April
11, 1917, Mr. Hearst wrote: 'Stripping
our country of men, money and food is a
dangerous policy. Our earnest sugges?
tion to the Congress is that it impera?
tively refuse to permit the further drain?
ing of our food supplies and our military
supplies to Europe.'
"This, of course, was equivalent to a
demand that, after going to war, we should
turn around and help Germany more than
; if we had continued to remain neutral.
On April 24, 1917, 'The New York Ameri?
can' eaid: 'The painful truth is that wc
are being practically used as a mere rein?
forcement of England's warfare and Eng?
land's future aggrandizement.' This, of
course, was an effort against our ally and
an effort to pander to anti-English preju?
dice in the interest of our foes, and noth?
ing else. On May 17 it advocated our
spending all our money on preparing our
army and navy here at home, 'and so
compelling Germany, if .?-he wants to
fight, to come to us,' which wag, of course,
equivalent to answering that we would
render no aid to defeat Germany until
she had defeated our allies and was pre?
pared to*attack us single-handed.
"On May 25 the same puper said of the
efforts to float the Liberty Loan: 'If you
want our food and wealth sent abroad to
help suffering England, buy a Liberty
bond, furnish the sinews of war." In view
of Hearst's continued effort to excite
hatred between the United ?States and
Encland, the implication of this sentence
cannot be mistaken. In the very next
sentence he subtly attempts to appeal to
all men with a feeling of affection for
Germany by intimating that whoever pur?
chased a Liberty bond desired to see Ger?
many not merely defeated but 'dismem?
bered.' On July 27 'The New York Amer?
ican' spoke of our soldiers being sent
over 'to be offered up in bloody sacrifice
to the ambition of contending nations on
foreign battlefields.' On November 22 it
spoke of our 'interfering in Europe's
quarrel.' It is absolutely impossible to
reconcile the government's action in pro?
ceeding against Tom Watson's paper with
its failure to proceed against Mr. Hearst's
papers on any theory that justice was to
be done alike to the strong and to the
Colonel Roosevelt reminds us that
Great Britain and France barred the
Hearst newspapers from circulation in
their mails and the Hearst correspond?
ents from access to their cables. He
notes that "since we entered the war Mr.
Hearst has at various times issued edi?
torials professing great patriotic zeal at
the very time when in other editorials he
was attacking the allies of America,
England and Japan in the most offen?
sive way, and thereby doing his best to
weaken the effect of our war against
Germany." Such action the Colonel
characterizes as "mere camouflage," and
he reminds us that "at this moment in
France the 'Bonnet Rouge' is being tried
for treason, although in every issue it
was blatant with pretence ft patriotism."
To quote the indictment further:
"By turning to The New York Tribune
of May 8, 191*8, Postmaster General Burle
son will find an ardent tribute made by
the former German correspondent of the
'K?lnische Zeitung' to Mr. Hearst and
Mr. Hearst's editor in chief, Arthur Bris?
bane, for having been 'auxiliaries of
valued influence' to Germany, especially
because of 'the editorials in the Hearst
newspapers.' I commend this to Mr.
Burleson and also to his Cabinet asso?
ciate," Mr. Daniels, in view of their recent
telegrams of congratulations to Mr. Bris?
bane, these telegrams having been pub?
lished in Mr. Hearst's paper, 'The Even?
ing Journal.' Mr. Burleson says of Mr
Hearst's alter ego that he congratulates
the people of Chicago, because they are
to have the benefit of Mr. Brisbane's 'abli
and unselfish efforts for justice and free
dorn and true democratic government.
And Mr. Daniels goes Mr. Burleson on
better in expressing the belief that Mr
Brisbane will preach patriotism and civi:
"The quotations above given deprive
Mr. Burleson, and the Administration, oi
which he is part, of any shred of justifi
cation in this matter. I have a good dea
more to say, especially about one or twe
English and German newspapers in thi
West, which Mr. Burleson left unmolest-et
at the very time of the action of his de
partment against 'The Metropolitan'; i
will be said in my letter to the Senato:
for permanent record."
Colonel Roosevelt's answer to the Post
master General's challenge, says "Thi
New York Evening Post," "has grea
force." And "The New York World" de
scribes as "substantially correct" th
charge that Mr. Hearst professes grea
patriotic zeal in certain editorials whil
in others he attacks the allies of Amer
ica, England and Japan "in the mos
offensive way." The New York Tribum
which has repeatedly and persistent)
impugned Mr. Hearst's loyalty, wonder
at his "sindular und sinister immunity,
an,d remarks that "if the governmer
thinks Hearst-inn is loyalty all the re*
of us want to know it,"
Some of his critics have said that M
Hearst "hates England more than r
loves America." A year ago "The Li
crary Digest" published an article call?
"Treason's Twilight Zone," in which v
discussed the aid and comfort given I
the enemy by those papers which attem]
to confuse the minds of the America
people about our motives in entering tl
war and to implant seeds of suspick
and distrust concerning our allies; ar
we asked our readers to clip and send <
editorial utterances of this kind. In r
sponse many of our readers, especia!
on the Pacific Coast, called our attenti<
to the Hearst publications.
By P. W. Wilson
African Correspondent of The London
THE conviction of Mrs. Stokes raij^,
i-sue with which France and
land have been familiar sine?
outbreak of war. The first object of a
censorship is to prevent naval and mijj
information reaching the enemy. In
matter Europe has had to be partieuj
careful, because our newspapers car. bd|g
ily commanicated to Germany by
routes. Greater freedom is possible
Amarica because the cables are under
trol, while it takes many weeks to trajd
printed matter. On neither side of thsj
lantic has there been any serious coi
versy over naval and military article?,!
June, 1915, Colonel Repington discios^
"The Times" the shortage of British
munition on the "Western front, but-thisj
a calculated indiscretion, and he was
tected by Mr. Lloyd George. More re?
he dealt with strategy on the Wer-ternfjj
and was prosecu'ed by Mr. Lloyd Gn
One or two naval articles by distintgui
writers have been suppressed, but othei
there has been little trouble over the
technical censorship of the war.
Serious difficulty does, however, ari
any rate in Britain, when there is i
f ference with expression of opinion. Tl
difficulties are of two kinds, and both
present in the case of Mrs. Stokes. Pi
we ha'/e comparisons between,; let us s
Socialist attack on the government
Northcliffe attack. Why should a syndi
newspaper like "The Foreword," of Glan
be suppressed when powerful organs go
free? Here let me say that we ha*?^
press in England which corresponds to
newspapers controlled by Mr. Hearst,
suggestion against Lord Northcliffe is
that he is unpatriotic or against the
but that his zeal may be sometimes gr<nj
than his discretion. On this there will
ways be two opinions, and you may trie
your choice. No one has ever doubted IM
?orthclift'e's ?tntire devotion to what he>]|
Heves to be the national interest.
Still, among our labor men, who
careful handling, we have found a sense
there is one rule for the strong and ano!
rule for the weak. In one case a newsp?
called "The Globe" (London) was suppre?
for saying substantially what appeare?
its contemporaries. I refer to the stfi
ments about Lord Kitchener's alleged jgfc
ignation. One result of such suspected?
criminatioa has been that practically?
proceedings against the press have bit
dropped, and you may say in England-!*
day pretty well anything you Eke. Extrfj?
pacifist literature is sometimes seized ?*$
destroyed, but there is a disinc?natiodb
make martyrs of women who obviously *gg
stirred by emotions which are more in?
venienir. than actually criminal.
Our second difficulty appears also to h?*r?J
arisen in the case of President WilsoAl
book, "The New Freedom."' This raisefM
dilemma with which our statesmen are vttH
familiar. When Lord Morley was Secretj?l
for India the extreme reformers constas?I
quoted against hilft his former writi?M|
about personal liberty, and tried to get pM
into jail for spreading their illustrious pro*4
ecutor's own doctrines. English pacift?
are fond of submitting to the government
passages from the Sermon on the Mount atui
asking whether these are seditious. W?f
people be prosecuted if they are found ??/**?
a Bible in their pocket? I have often he; :i
this asked in the House of Commons. an|
on our military tribunals there have be?jf
warm theological arguments with con?eien?
tious objectors who quote the Beatitud?*!
There was a time when the nation dealt ve*?j
seVerely with irritating people of this p??-,
suasion. Most of us. I think, are now of th*
opinion that we took them too Beriousljr?
Many of them are quite genuine and hawi:
done good work among the poor before tlw|
war. Others are egotists. But in eith?p
case it is a pity to make martyrs excipi
where necessary. I am myself firmly coas
vinced that the best answer to bad proptfj
ganda is good propaganda. A thing printeej
can be answered. The real danger is o?tajA
i what is muttered under the surface. Yo-j-f]
i own exposures of the Hearst press are e-f*j
: actly the material which gets at the rnf?
' who might be led astray if the thing wejf ?
not put so clearly.
I know well that the American and Br!"K
ish cases are not identical. Our populati*p
speaks one language, and is. broadly, horajr
geneous. You have many races and ma-jy
languages to deal with. Apparently yoST
trouble lies, or. rather, lay, with certain -*/?8
defined sections of the people. Our troulp
is the general morale of the whole cosp
munity, which has had four years of w?fc.
It is remarkable that in Britain as th?
strain has increased so has there been s?|
stored a wider latitude of discussion. Soa? ?
of this discussion has been misunderstood j
j here, because it has suggested, undoubted^
I two views of peace by negotiation. Heno* I
the importance to England of Presides* ?
Wilson's definite declaration that the ef* '
proaches by the Central Powers are insis
cere. The working classes in England will
take that from President Wilson when thif
would not so readily accept it from states?
men nearer home.
A general conclusion from our experiene? ?
seems to be, therefore, that the state shouW
exercise its right of interference with dis?
cussion as rarely as possible, but that in ? '-.
administering the law it must deal with ?Ik
solute impartiality. In a democracy grata?'
social unrest is bound to arise if there i*
the slightest suspicion that the poor art
punished while the rich go free. On*
trouble in Ireland is due. mainly to our fail?
ure to administer the law fearlessly WJi
Ulster when illegal drilling took puM
What the Protestants were allowed to doth?;1
Catholics claim the right to do, and t"f# ?
foundations of authority were weakened ?I.I
their base, which must always be j us t'?*?#. '
The mistake did not fully reveal itself until
years later, but we are now paying the pen?
alty?and it is a serious one. With regai*4.'?
to your own problems, the question migM ;
be asked, not so much "What do they amoaiff
to now?" but "To what will they grow (ft
years to come?" Whatever the state do?*
or leaves undone becomes; a precedent.
On the charge that the United States -?v?ft
driven into war by profiteers there is furelf
an answer which is quite plain to every d?
tached observer. Before you came into tfcf V
war you had the profits and you made B*>
payments; after coming in you have had t?.
make pavments and you have had to tait*]
profits. I am told that of every dollar ma????
by Mr. Schwab he pays back 89 cents to th#j
state. The percentage is certainly enor-1
mous. Jf Mrs. Stokes brings out facts liM^
that, even though it rhay not be her inten?
tion so to do, she will have done a publj?,
service without quite knowing it.
Evolution of a Hero
tFrom fhe Pittsburgh Chroittcle-Telegi'aph'i
A Battle Creek woman danced three timaS^
with a good looking lieutenant ?nd th?*ft
"Pardon me, sir. but your face is somt
what familiar. Haven't I seen you soma
v. her? before ?"
"Yes, madam, you hove," the offtcir r?*
?ponded. "! was your milkman more thfUl
three years." * ;
' . ?j
xml | txt