New-York tribune. [volume], March 13, 1920, Page 10, Image 10

About New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
Pint to Last?the Troth: News?Edl
toriala?Advertisements
theHiiii o. tie Audit Bureau of Ctrcalatlons
SATURDAY, MARCH 13, 1920.
? '.ir-.a i , i , ? ,,-,,;, , ==.
Owned and published daily by New Tark Wrfbiiae
Inc. a Near Toi a Corporation. Oiden Raid. Prasl
?AtNK; O. Vemor Botera. Vlce-Preeident: Helen
Rosara Re?d. Secretary ; R. E Maxfleld. Treasurer.
Address. Tribuna Buildtns. IM Naaaau Street. Vtem
Jeta, T?l?phona. Beekman 300?.
?rrBBCRtPTIO*** BATKS?By nan. innl-dl-it
Porta?. EN TUB UNITED STATES AND
CANADA
On? Six One
Tear. Months. Month.
paft- and SKmday.?H..0 ?S.?? ?I.??
?>aH? only ...V?.. 8.0? ?.9. .IS
?ii??ay only . 400 2.00 .40
?Sunday only. Canaula. ?.00 3.25 ?SS
roBEIUN BA'iKS
Daily an? Sunday.?Sfi.oo $13.30 ?2.40
petti ant? .7.. VT.40 ?TO 1.45
timr?aj. M)l? . ?.T5 ?.13 .??
geeaiaS at the Peato-re at New Tertt as Beee-4
?CUaa MaU MatUi
GUARANTY
Van ?as purcttaaa men-handl*e edvertlted ta THE
TRIBUNE with absolute ?afety?far If dl?etl.f_e
tie? refaits la any case THE TRIBUNE suaraatees
t? pay year mesay book upas rea-ost. Ne red tapa.
Ma aulbbllnf. Wa raaka food promptly if the
?dvertUer daaa set.
MTMRKR QT THE A?SOCIAT_D FTOSS
The Associated Press la eaclusl-ely entitled t? the
ase for republlcatlon of all news dlspatchee credits?.
to It or not oUwnrlae credited In Ulla paper and
also the local nous of spontaneous origin published
herein.
All riattta of republics*--?, of att other matter
herein also are raserred.
France's Just Indignation
The French press properly re?
lents President Wilson's statement
to the effect that France is to-day
controlled by "a militaristic party."
For the President's "intolerant and
tempestuous wanderings," as a writer
in Le Petit Bleu calls them, are, of
course, discounted in France as the
manifestations of a petulant spirit
put on edge by disappointments and
illness, but the French cannot ex?
cuse the President for describing
them as "militaristic," a most op?
probrious word in the Wilson vocabu?
lary, because of the measures of
self-protection which they have been
forced to consider as a result of the
failure of promises Mr. Wilson made
to them.
It is the inequitableness of Mr.
Wilson's attitude which the French
lind most galling. In the peace con?
ference France sought, above all
other things, definite guaranties
agair.?t a rf*nev,al of German aggres?
sion. The terrible lessons of the
war would go for naught if the
eastern frontier were left exposed
again to the attack of Germany.
Foch, the deepest student of France's
defensive needs, asked for a defen?
sive barrier against German in?
vasion.
This barrier was denied to F ranee,
and France's position on her eastern
frontier may easily be, a generation
hence, almost as weak as it was in
18V0 or in 1914. Foch dealt with
actualities. But because of Mr. Wil?
son's opposition to the Foch plan
of defense Clemenceau abandoned
the Foch program. He accepted in
lieu of it the draft of a tripartite
treaty of alliance, which provided
that Great Britain and the United
States were to go to France's aid in
case of unprovoked aggression by
Germany. It was a bargain in which
the substance of a military guaranty
was ?iven up for the shadow. Great
Britain couldn't save France from
invasion in 1914. Neither could the
United States have saved her from
it. Would one or both of them be
able to save her under the uncer?
tain conditions of the future?
Clemenceau excused himself to his
countrymen by exhibiting Mr. Wil?
son's signature to the triple alliance
contract. But that contract has
been buried from sight for more
than eight months. The President
has shown no interest in its fate.
The French can see no signs of its
acceptance by the United States.
They consequently feel that Clemen?
ceau blundered into a one-sided ex?
change. That feeling undoubtedly
. contributed in part to the ''Tiger's"
I defeat for the Presidency.
f Now France is compelled to do
what she can to rectify what she
thinks was Clemenceau's error. She
hears President Wilson talking about
withdrawing completely from the
?ffairs of Europe unless his solution
of the Adriatic problem is accepted.
If he threatens to recall the German :
treaty he may also threaten to re
call the French treaty. But the
French hold that he has no right
to retire from European affairs. He
Intervened last May in a matter
vitally affecting France's security.
He compelled a rewriting even of
the convention for the temporary
occupation of the Rhineland. So
France sees in the Hitchcock letter
evidence that the President is ready
to forget his pledge and to wash
his hands of any and all obligations
to guarantee French security.
Mr. Wilson's Paris critics cant be
blamed. They are touched to the
?quick by the brutality of the charge
that France, the chief victim of the
war. has become "militaristic." when
Mr. Wilson's unredeemed assurances
alone have compelled her to resume
a policy which she abandoned at his
request. France is no more "mili
taristir*'? to-day than Great Britain
fa or the United States is. It is
enough to shock her sensibilities to
be pilloried before the world as en?
tertaining "imperialistic" designs,
-when the only thing she hah done is j
to try to reinsure herself against
the bankruptcy of the Wilson tri
partite military treaty.
The Mayor*? Mouthful?
It seem? indeed like painting the
lily to call attention to any such de?
tail in our city's administration as
the oral forthputtings of our Mayor
?their quaint abruptness, their un?
conventional use of manners seldom
before ?racing our City Hall. Yet
Mr. Henry L. Stimson'a refusal to
appear before their honors the
Mayor and the Comptroller*?by and
with the approval of a United States
judge?suggests that even this de?
tail of administrative action is not
without its importance to the public.
The development of the truth
touching our traffic situation is
surely a matter of considerable con?
cern to the public. It might seem
not beneath the attention of a
Mayor, however disgruntled with
his failure to beat the city's rail?
ways and subways into submission.
Mr. Stimson is an intelligent and
fair-minded citizen as well as an
able attorney. What he has to say
should be well worth hearing as a
contribution to at least one aspect of
the whole truth. Yet we are to be
denied this help through the grace?
ful insults and genial rowdiness of
Mr. Hylan's and Mr. Craig's tactics
of examination.
What we would suggest is that
while the Mayor's mouthfuls are and
should be immortal, the truth is
something else again and well worth
obtaining.
"Get Out and Stay
"The government
the shipping busines
sible and stay out"
Chairman Payne of
Board. Thus again j
opinion adverse to go
ership and operation
business. A national i
was justifiabie in time
too costly and inelas
purposes.
Mr. Payne says tha
20, 1919, the governn^
operations, not allow:
seem, for capital char;
! ation, netted a profit oJ
with $165,000,000 moi
j the board by the War l>
j and the Food Administrate
! at present there is little or no ?. fit
j in operation. Shipping rates have
? fallen, and close figuring and indi
' vidual initiative are now needed,
j and the government cannot do busi
I nesa in a flexible enough way." But
Mr. Payne is positive that private
owners can operate at a profit, in
competition with foreign fleets.
This judgment may be a little over
sanguine. But both from the politi?
cal and the economic points of view
it is desirable to leave nothing un?
done to enlist the individual owner
and operator in the experiment of
maintaining a first-class American
merchant marine. Our shipping is
handicapped in the matter of build?
ing cost, but this handicap may be
i reduced or overcome by standardized
| construction on a large scale. The
i La Follette seamen's act imposes
unnecessary burdens on American
; ships. We are late, too, in entering
j the lists as a competitor for the
world's ocean-carrying trade. But
the venture is worth while, and at
the present stage of national prog?
ress the time is ripe for it.
Possibly individual effort will have*
| to be helped for a long time by gov
j ernment aid. That is an experience
j which the other leading maritime
! nations have gone through. And un- ?
? doubtedly a policy of government as?
sistance is preferable to a naked gov
: ernment effort to create and operate
| a merchant marine. The risk is less
: in case of failure. Success, if it
I comes, will rest on a broader foun
; dation.
It will take some years for the
I Shipping Board to dispose of the ves
| sels it owns or is building. More
; than 2,300 ships are still to be
finished and put in commission. The
itiansition to individual ownership
j and operation will be gradual. But
the government's ultimate with?
drawal from the shipping business
should be accepted as a fixed conclu?
sion and made the basis of any new
shipping legislation which Congress
has in mind.
i A Twentieth Amendment
The prize letter yesterday in The
Tribune's platform contest empha?
sizes something which, it seems to
us, has not received adequate public
attention?namely, the disregard of
, the Constitution revealed by recent
history.
The Constitution created a Con?
gress, representative of the people, to
make laws, adopt policies and in all
major matters determine national ac?
tion. Decisions having been reached
by Congress, the Presidency was
established to execute them. The
.government was to be parliament?
ary, with an agency, possessing as
to the methods employed great inde?
pendence, to carry into effect the
popular will as declared by Con?
gress.
Such was the general scheme?a
scheme in its main features charac?
teristic of the institutions of all free
peoples.
This system still exists with re?
spect to domestic matters, but as to
international relations it is wellnigh
wrecke*? T,k? present President hm
set himself up as an exclusive mas?
ter in the field of foreign affaira.
The Chief Executive, responsible
nowhere except by impeachment, is
to make war and conclude peace a?
he pleases. We have seen Vera
Cru? occupied by our armed forces
while Congress was not consulted
until after the event. We have seen
American regiments sent to Arch?
angel and into Siberia without Con?
gress being consulted either before
or after. We have seen a treaty
negotiated which the President holds
must be accepted just as he helped
secretly to write it.
Thus there is a claim of a prerog?
ative not dissimilar to the one-man
ism characteristic of kaiserism and
czarism. The clause requiring an
affirmative vote by two-thirds of the
Senate to effect ratification gives a
President a chance to play despot.
Ordinarily a President will be able
to line up one-third of the Senate by
the use of patronage and influence
and thus force acceptance of his
mandates by blocking action. The
Constitution says treaties shall be
made by the President and Senate
acting together. The new doctrine,
sought to be established by usage, is
that the President in effect shall
make them alone.
The Republican platform, in the
clearest and most positive terms,
should declare against despotic one
man-ism and stand firm for respon?
sible government. It might also well
declare for a constitutional amend?
ment requiring a President to asso?
ciate members of the Senate with
him when negotiating. Such associ?
ation has been the Presidential prac
tice, but practice has not sufficed to
nstr?ct a willful President.
val Concentration
now known that during the
early summer of 1917 the
marine campaign suc
ing the lines of corn
he Allies.
3 been defeated, the
?t would have been
ormany would prob
uo into possession of the
Allied fleets. With
hree to one against it, our
i have been swept from the
we should have faced in
on or capitulation?with pros
, i.cts of paying a vast indemnity to
Germany. Such are some of the in?
ferences which flow from the facts
now coming out in the Senate com?
mittee's investigation of the conduct
of the Navy Department. In the
summer of 1917 all depended on
maintaining the supplies to the Al?
lied armies, and that depended on
naval concentration against the sub?
marines.
Admiral Mahan, recognized by all
nations as the ?greatest expounder
of maritime principles, declared a
decade ago :
"In any military scheme that
comes before you, let your lirst ques?
tion to yourself be, Is this con?
sistent with the requirement of con?
centration? Never attempt to strad?
dle, to do two things at the same
time, unless your force is evidently
so supreme that you have clearly
more than enough for each." (Naval
Strategy, p. 43.)
But with the fate of all freedom
loving nations depending on obtain?
ing negation of the submarine cam?
paign, and the entire navy of the
United States suddenly available, in
theory, how did our Navy Depart?
ment act? In his report Admiral
Sims says that thirteen months after
we entered the war
. . . "I was still urgently recom?
mending an increase of forces?still
trying to convince the department
that the war was in the eastern At?
lantic, that the United States naval
front was off the European coast and
not off the United StateB coast. . . .
"During the most critical months
of the enemy's submarine campaign
against the Allied lines of com?
munication the department violated
the fundamental strategical prin?
ciple of concentration of a maximum
for?a in the critical area of a con?
flict."
Of the two million soldiers we sent
to Europe only about three hundred
thousand went in the first twelve
months of our participation; so dur?
ing the earlier period the demands
for convoy duty were light. Yet our
navy comprised thirty-fivo battle?
ships, forty cruisers, seventy-four
destroyers, nineteen torpedo boats
and sixtyrsix submarines. Though
the situation cried loudly for instant
concentration, not until nearly a
month after we entered the war did
our first flotilla of but six destroyers
6ail for anti-submarine duty. Why
had they waited nearly a month?
Why did our sixty-eight remaining
destroyers and our nineteen torpedo
boats continue to wait?
Admiral Sims was forced to ap-f
peal to Ambassador Page, who
cabled on April 27 that "there is rea?
son for the greatest alarm about the
issue of the war, caused by the in- ?
creasing success of Germany's sub- '
marines." At that time, having de- '
cided to send six of our seventy-four
destroyers to British waters, Secre?
tary Daniels was proposing to Bend
four more and four patrol boats to
the Arctic Russian waters! He was
"straddling." Does such crass viola?
tion of the first principle of warfare
?concentration?give any evidence
that the Navy Department had any
"war plan" in April, 1917, or had the
slightest definite idea as to what it
wanted to do about the war?
The days of Mr. Daniels as Secre?
tary of the Navy are num?ered, to
less than three hundred and sixty.
It will matter little if aft the naval
investigation develops he succeeds in
passing the blame up to President
Wilson, who appointed him and kept
him in office, or in passing it down
to Admiral Benson, the chief of
naval operations, whom he picked
up from a captaincy as superin?
tendent of a navy yard, making him
the chief officer of the navy, and
keeping him in office throughout the
war. It will serve no worthy pur?
pose to visit resentment for the mis?
management of the navy on either
of them. But the lessons we should
take to heart and apply. Our fleet
must be adequate and our Navy De?
partment so organized and managed
in future that the country can rely
on the navy for instant and adequate
defense.
The Noblest Mausoleum
What Crave Would Our Boys
Themselves Desire?
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: As my son was not in the United
States service when he was killed In
France I have hesitated to speak ont as
to the mistake of transporting the
bodies of the American dead from their
resting places abroad. But now that a
bill in Congress threatens to transport
the bodies of our soldiers who died
abroad every American has an interest
in the issue.
Lying, as they do, on the soil they
died to Bave, our boys have a fate to
be envied, and their graves are the best
and most natural monuments of our
share in the Great War. They record
its glory and its cost. Can one imagine
that the boys themselves would wish
to be separated, dispersed and huddled
sadly into country churchyard.*- in Amer?
ica out of a supposed desire on their
part to lie near their kin? Soldiers
are not like that. These boy? are with
their kin now, and their names stand
near each other on a register that will
not be lost. These cemeteries in Franco
will becomo places of pilgrimage for
Americans, and the nephews and great
nephews of the dead will go back to
their native towns and tell their neigh?
bors how and where they found the
name of theirs, of which all are proud.
Such a homecoming as this will have
meaning in it.
The transportation of corpses is al?
ways unpleasant. When we hear of the
transfer from Europe even of a dead
millionaire we ask ourselves, Why could
not his family be content to leave him
whero he dropped ? They must have
some important mausoleum in Woodlawn
or in Greenwood. But in this case it is
proposed to withdraw the dead from the
most magnificent mausoleum that fate
can give a soldier?a grave near a bat?
tlefield. ' JOHN JAY CHAPMAN.
New York, March 10, 1920.
Burleson Truck No. 4101
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Last Thursday night on the
West Shore ferry which leaves West
Forty-second Street at 12 o'clock my
sense of economy was troubled by the
6ound of an engine running without
pause on the trip across. Even though
this is against the rule of the road,
which is plainly posted at both ends
of the boat, I wondered if the owner's
own common sense should not have
prevented such waste. ;
As the boat drew Into Weehawken I
went out on the front, and lo! there
stood United States mall truck 4101
trembling and perspiring from the
overworking engine. Somehow my
thoughts turned to the tax reports I
had been working on, and I wondered
how much of our hard earned cash
goes up in smoke thus, to say nothing
of the waste of nature's limited gifts.
Whether the colored person in the
driver's seat was just too lazy to get
out and crank his engine or whether
the inefficiency at the head of the de?
partment has, worked its way clear
through perhaps others can tell.
ONE OF THE PAYERS.
New York, March 10, 1920.
All the Employees' Fault )
I To tne Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Regarding the telephone contro
' versy, I will say that I have no intor
? est in the company and know nothing
! about the matter other than does any
? outsider, but I would bo willinp*, for all |
I that, to place a fair-sized bet that all
? the trouble is the fault of the employees.
I have no doubt that every new girl
; engaged mukes more mistakes, takes in
\ struction and deserved rebukes in a
! worse spirit, is more lazy and generally
I more inefficient than the girl whose
! place she takes. And I ask you what !
j you would do or could do in the com
I zany's place under these circumstances?
Or what any one who reads this would
or could do? BETCHER.
Brooklyn, March 11, 1920.
Feminization Apace
j To the Editor of The Tribune.
j Sir: English heads of families do
not hector or bully, as you seem to in?
dicate in your editorial to day on
Cardinal O'Connell's pronunciamento.
Authority can be exercised without i
anything of that sort. But you may be I
quite sure that if the man does not
exercise authority the woman will, as
is generally the case in this country.
There cannot be two heads. To all im?
partial observers the effeminization of
the American man proceeds apace, and
it is not good for the country?neither
for the men nor the women.
IMPARTIAL.
I New York, March 4, 1920.
The Candid Volunteer
{From The Manchester Guardian)
An Australian who did clerical Work
for his government during the war
tells how in going through a batch of
enlistment forms one day and checking
the usual questions as to name, age,
address, occupation and so on, he came
upon one decidedly original reply. The
question, "Stat? in which enlisted,"
was answered by ths assurance
"Strictly sober."
The Conning Tower
BALLADE OF THE BRAVEST
Sing to the lads who hitvo journeyed back
After the ?lory of the fight;
Honor each Bill and Tom and Jack,
Who's fought hi? way in pain and fright
Through many a desperate, weary night.
Honor then?, but In the back of your head,
Don't fail to keep one memory bright:
The very bravest men are dead.
Forgive the lad* if their work is ?lack
And their manners a trifle impolite;
For civilian varnish will sometimes crack
To ?how you some of the bitter ?pite
That's bred in men when the rein? are tight
And food is ?caree and blood i? shed.
Forgive, but keep one altar white:
The very bravest men are dead.
Know, that the bravest led the pack ;
Know that the bravest sought no flight;
Know that they led in each attack,
And the most of them did not live to writ?
Books of themselves, and they can't recite
High heroics and tales of dread.
Then look on your ease with heart contrite :
The very bravest men are dead.
L'ENVOI
Friend, though your memory be slight,
And all your thought for daily bread,
Forget not, in your strength and aright,
The very bravest men are dead.
, Wim. Ijo?.
Those who cannot keep from men?
tioning Kipling when they say "But
that's another story" are the same
lads who havo to add "Strange to say"
when they say "I saw something funny
in Life the other day."
Epatant It Is
Sir: If the clothes of another era
really are interesting, picture me on a
summer afternoon in 1898, boarding the
gunboat Gloucester, just back from the
Spanish War. With a view to knocking
the eyes out of the young officers, I was
got up in a stiffly starched red and
white striped shirtwaist with gold
studs, surmounted by a standing white
linen collar four and a half inches
high?I was built on long linoB?and a
blue and red silk Ascot tie. About my
slender waist was a red belt, clasped
with a Chinese silver buckle the size
of a bread and butter plate, the gift
of an ardent admirer, who said the
characters on it meant "A thousand
years of happiness!" Another a. a, said
they meant "Go to tne devil!" I know
now which was right, but?n'importe!
On the very pinnacle of my curly brown
head was perched a narrow brimmed
white sailor hat with a red band on
which the word "Chatham" was em?
broidered in large white silk letters for
fear people wouldn't know where I
spent my summers. My skirt was of
white duck robust enough for the main?
sail of a four-master and properly
starched; it weighed about six pounds.
My Chippendale legs were encased in
scarlet silk stockings, and I wore heavy
tan low shoes with round toes and
solos about half an inch thick. At the
time the get-up was considered very
' chic. Looking back over a couple of
decades, I should say ?patant was a
better word. DAISY BELL. .
On that summer afternoon in 1898
we were, alas, nowhere near the gun?
boat Gloucester. But if Daisy had
been in Oconomowoc, Wls., that day
she might have seen us riding a Barnes
White Flyer toward Delafleld or may?
be it was Nashotah. Bicycle shoes,
plaid stockings, knickerbockers, a turtle
neck pweater, and a cap with a long
visor made up our costume. And in
the evening patent leather shoes, white
duck trousers with an indestructible
crease, a pink shirt with tie to match,
a high white collar, and a d. b. blue
serge coat.
The coat, of course, would be re?
moved after supper, when one became
an oarsman. It would lie in tho bow of
the boat or on the lap of a girl three
or four years older than the oarsman.
The collar, however, was not to bo re?
moved under any conditions.
The privilege c^ purchasing lemon
ado for young women garbed somewhat
like Daisy Bell (see above)s or of tak?
ing them rowing was restricted to Mon?
days, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, an?
Thursdays. In 1898 a young woman
had her future to think of, and on Fri?
days, Saturdays and Sundays, when the
self-supporting business men came to
philandor, she could not afford to waste
the precious hours with young Willie
Baxters whose coll?ge flagpin fastened
her white puff tie to her blue shirt- ?
waist.
Those Interborongh Bines
I got those Interborough blues;
I'X? Bot those bonds of many shades of bues.
I wish I'd invested the money In stocking
up boozd.
That is the reason I've got the Interborough
blues. Mabcei. Btisinbhucg?.
Mr. Arthur Brisbane observes that
Ruth Randall's diary proves that the
wages of sin is death. Our conjecture
is thnt it doesn't prove anything except
that a woman named Ruth Randall
wrote a diary. As to the wages of sin
being death, that, we fear, is a ques?
tion of definition. It depends on what
you mean by "wages," "sin," and
"death."
The New York verce, as revealed in
voise, is shown in Mrs. M. E. Roesch's
couplet, in the Evening Mail:
'Twas she who brought them into the
world,
And she's to blame if their morals
are spoiled.
Gambling Loese?
Sir ; The Supreme Court, let It be known,
has not reversed the Treasury's ruling that
losses incurred by insidious chewing gum slot
machines are not deductible from net in?
come in calculaUng the income tax.
_ Nik Ncb.
Ivory exoxtosea may be found on the
flat bones of the skull, or in the audi?
tory meatus growing from the petrous
bone, or causing unilateral exophthal
mos if springing from the orbital plgte
of the frontal bone or tho walls of the
frontal sinus.?Page 671, "Index of Dif?
ferential Diagnosis," Herbert French,
editor.
The source, Chiro notes,' of the far
famed osseous dome.
Non sequitur No. 891 [From the
World]: "Had Saxe lived in the pres?
ent day he would undoubtedly have be?
come column conductor for a daily pa?
per and amassed great wealth."
The hounds of spring may be? as
advertised, on winter's trrces.
But they appear to be muzzled.
F. P. A.
GOOD HEAVENS! AND HE'S ALREADY SWALLOWED IT!
H_l____ Copyright. 1920. Now York Tribune Inn. H
_ *
Poland and the Bolshevists
By Frank H. Simonds.
The announcement, several times
made and as often denied, that Marshal
Foch is about to go to Poland, de?
serves to be read in connection with
the vast anti-Polish propaganda which
is being disseminated in the United
States at the present time, designed
to injure the Poles and misrepresent
the facts which confront these gallant
people.
A great deal of capital ia being made,
chiefly through British journals, of the
fact that the Poles are occupying a
very far flung line toward the east,
greatly beyond the meager limit3 as?
signed to the Polish state by the Paris
conference. This is interpreted as
the conclusive evidence of colossal
Polish dreams of imperialism.
The truth is otherwise.' The Poles
have on their eastern frontier the most
dangerous and menacing enemy faced
by any nation, the BolBhevists, and this
enemy has already announced an in?
tention of making a spring drive
against the Poles. There is not a bit
of evidence to prove that the Bolshe?
vists have laid aside this purpose, 01
would lay it aside merely because th<
Poles retired from their present front
The Bolshevist Attack
On the contrary all evidence con
firms the belief that the Bolshevist:
are rapidly accepting the nationalists
aspirations of their old Czarist rulen
and look forward' to a reconquest o
all the border lands. Thus confrontei
with the probability of an attack, dc
signed to extinguish their receotiv ac
quired liberties, the Poles are occupy
ing territory in the pathway? o_ th
storm that the fighting may take plac<
not on their own soil, but on that o
the enemy.
If the .British and the American
who criticize the Poles were prepare
to guarantee to send tlic necessar
number of divisions to. Poland if th
Bolshevists attacked Poland, then thei
might be some warrant for the suj
gestion that the Poles retire to tin
Paris Conference frontiers. But it
a notorious fact that neither Britis
nor ^American troops are availabl
Thus if British and American state
men persuade or coerce the Poles in'
evacuating their present positions, tl
Poles may find themselves disarmed I
their alleged friends in the present
of their enemies. ?>
Americans ehould be very shy of a
cepting European estimates of tl
Polish as of the Turkish situation,
both cases the policies of the Brlti
and the French conflict. At Paris t
British did everything that lay with
their power to restrict Poland, t
French to make Poland truly a vial
state. The explanation of the Briti
course lay in the perception that
strong Poland, necessarily united wi
a strong France, would serve as t
foundation for a European balance
power, which would free the Fren
from abject dependence upon Briti
foreign policy.
French Policy
France, on the other hand, saw tl
a strong Poland would mean a gn
increase of French security, for G
many would have to face two cnem
if she decided to take up again 1
age-long enmity to France. But it
inconceivable that in this instai
there can be any American end ser
by accepting British policy blindly i
thus, in effect, forging the chains
which British policy would dorain
the Continent of Europe for the n
few decades.
It is a mistake to think the m
question of "self-determination" really
explains the Polish question.' The
thing that lies at the bottom of this
is the clash between the British and
French schemes for the futifre, for the
new Europe, that is so much dis?
cussed nowadays.. The French, realiz?
ing that American aid is unlikely and
that British support can only be had if
France frankly consents to lay aside
all the natural aspirations of a great
power, arc seeking to achievr* a Eu?
ropean system of alliances which will
fortify them against Germany and
abolish their dependence upon Britain.
Our Sympathy With Poland
Poland itself is entitled to every pos?
sible consideration; the 25,000,000 Poles
must constitute a potent factor in the
new Europe, but it is inevitable that
this new Poland will have to face two
grave dangers, the one Russian, the
other German. If the new state is not
provided with fencible frontiers, at
least on the Russian side, a new parti?
tion and a new series of European
wars are wcilnigh inevitable.
American sympathy with Poland
ought to be far keener than it is, but
American knowledge of the Polish
question unhappily comes from sources
most interested in prejudicing the |
American mind against the Poles. This |
is time of the Germans, the Bol?
shevists and of the British, all three j
of whom are for quite different reasons j
unfriendly tb the Polish state. At.
Paris the direct interposition of Lloyd !
George cost Poland those frontiers
which even President Wilson was will?
ing to concede, and sinro that ?im*
British influence and British publica?
tions have been steadily hostile to the
Poles.
A Great Liberation
Now, the question of the extent tc
which America wishes to act in Europe
is obviously problematical, but certainly
there can bo no desire on the part of
the Americans to be used in the Polish
matter, to be over-persuaded to reach
a decision and exert any influence
detrimental to Poland, with no accu?
rate recognition o:' the fact that Poland
has unhappily become a mere pawn in
the game of An?glo-French foreign
policies.
Poland has peculiar claims upon
American sympathy, Poland's libera?
tion is one of the great facts of the '
recent war, and we should be slow in
sacrificing Poland by our attitude S
when tho sacrifice will result merely j
in the victory of one set of profes?
sional politicians over another and of
the strengthening of one foreign policy
at the cost of another.
Where it is possible to guarantee Po?
land against Bolshevist attacks, it may
be equally possible and wise to fix the
limits of the eastern extension of ter?
ritory occupied by the Poles. But just
now the agitation in this direction far
too patently suggests unconcern with
the fate of Poland and a complete con?
centration upon nationalistic and in
ternationalistic aims, which ought not
to be overlooked by Americans.
{Copyright. 19:0. McClur? Nowspao?r
Syndicale.)
Entangling Alliances
(From The Providence Journal)
The Adriatic question is a striking
example of what George Washington
had in mind when he said in the fare?
well address, which was read and ap?
plauded in Congress the day before the
President dispatched his latest note:
"It must be unwise in us to implicate
ourselves in the ordinary vicissitudes
of European politics.**
The Working'Motor
How Gasoline and Garages
Serve a Countryside
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Dr. Cole gives only part of the
case in his letter of recent date. Grant?
ing that the garages of Bradford do
employ fifteen men who were former!**
in other pursuits and that the town has
only a dozen commercial vehicles, this
is not the whole of the story.
Some of the runabouts are used for
business purposes. The light trucks of
Bradford make regular trips into {he
adjacent towns, permitting one man to
cover territory which would need ?*ev
cral men and teams if, indeed, n at?
tempt were to be made to cover it at
all.
Moreover, there are many trucks in
the outlying districts which depend
upon the Bradford garages for repairs.
I have two myself, and but for these
trucks our activities would be very
small indeed. As it is, through tho
active season we employ an average of
half a dozen men, who are all kept
busy in the rai?ing of food products.
It is almost safe to say that because
of these trucks this one farm la pro?
ducing as much food as the combined
forces of the garage employees and my
own men could do in these back hills
without truck.-*.
And this does not take into account
that a Bradford physician, with his au?
tomobile, attends to cur ailments; a
Bradford butcher, with his de.ivery
car, supplies us with meat; the bank
cashier of an afternoon runs out U?
keep an eye on the industry of
his customers, the rural mail iervifli
ia handled by truck and even tho un?
dertaker makes quick trips throujen use
ol a motor n torse.
Dr. Cole is perfectly right in his con?
tention that money which should rep?
resent savings is now used for joy
riding, but he is wrong in contending
that there is a loss in production be?
cause of automobiles and the garages.
D. A. J.
East Corinth, Vt., March 5, 1920.
Who Is Disinterested?
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: In your issue of March 3 you
print a letter from James 0. Tryon,
who says "that the many estimable
citizens who have given their money to
the Anti-Saloon League should be ad?
vised of the fact that the persons who
are active in that organization are not
performing their duties with any idea
of disinterested service to a cause.
They aro in it for what they cur. got
out of it, financially or politically." I
desire to ask Mr. Tryon if he is giving
his personal attention to so much
liquor propaganda over his signature,
out of "disinterested service to ?
cause." The Rev. W. H. Freeman, who
made the "startling" revelation of the
affairs of the Anti-Saloon League, con?
fessed that this same league offered hi?
the munificent salary of $30 a week. Does
Mr. Tryon believe that one who ia
willing these^ days to work for $30 a
week is in it'feir what ho "can get out
of it financially**? When an investiga?
tion of the league's affairs is held, if
it is not "stalled" by the politicians, it
will show that this work Is oemg car?
ried en by those who are truly com?
mitted to a "disinterested sen-ice." X
also challenge Mr. Tryon to name the
man who boasted that he "was in the
employ of the Anti-Saloon League as
a collector of contributions, and that
he was making more money that ev?
before in his life."
A. D. BATCHELOR,
AseoeUte Superintendent, Metropoli?
tan District.
New York, March 11, 1020. -M