Idaho County free press. [volume], March 16, 1916, Image 6

About Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current

Image provided by: Idaho State Historical Society

                
EDITORIAL PAGE OF THE FREE PRESS
IDAHO COUNTY FREE PRESS
[b A_ WTSENER, Editor and Proprietor
W. L. CAMPBELL, Local Editor
ORANGEVILLE, IDAHO, THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 1916
ELIHU ROOT CASUALLY CONSIDERED.
Among the other things Elihu Root had to say about
President Wilson and his handling of the foreign situation, is
the following passage concerning Germany's violation of
gium :
Bel
''The law protecting Belgium which was violated
was our law and the law of every civilized country *
Moreover, that law was written into a solemn
and formal convention, signed and ratified by Ger
many and Belgium and France and the United States,
on which those other countries agreed with us that the
law' should be observed. When Belgium was invaded
that agreement was binding not only morally but also
strictly and technically, because there was at that time
no nation a party to the war which w'as not also a
party to the convention. * * *
"It w r as not necessary that the United States
should go to war in defense of the violated law. A
single official expression by the government of the
United States, a single sentence denying assent and re
cording dissapproval of what Germany did in Bel
gium, would have given the people of America that
leadership to which they were, entitled in their earnest
groping for the light.
Now Mr. Root lias had a general reputation previous to
his making this speech of being very consistent. He perform
ed at the Chicago convention in 1912 and has always been con
sistent from the view point of the machine and big interests.
It is plain that from every view'point the above is extremely
inconsistent. Perhaps the most striking illustration and re
minder to Elihu w r as the fact that during his encumbency of the
office of Secretary of State under Roosevelt, without "a sin
gle sentence denying assent and recording disapproval.
Japan was permitted to violate the sovereignty of Korea.
Again Mr. Root has been reminded of the perceling of Morocco
under Roosevelt's reign. Also the latter grabbed a chunk from
South America and asked Columbia what she was going to do
about it.
i i
9 9
y y
Some other distinguished opinion gathered by the Literary
Digest, other than that of Elihu Root's may find logical ap
plication in this matter. Mr. David Lawrence, the New York
Evening Post's correspondent at Washington, represents of
ficial circles as being well pleased with Mr. Root's speech.
This writer imagines the administration calling up Mr. Root
on the long distance telephone and saying in part:
"We wouldn't have dared to make our foreign
policy an issue, in the campaign and try to seek parti
zan advantage from our conduct of national matters,
but you relieve us of that embarrassment. You
challenge and we accept. * * *
"When you take us to task for not going to war
with Mexico, or for not abandoning diplomacy and
fighting Germany; for not mixing into Europe's mud
dle, and for not protesting against Germany's viola
tion of Belgium, we must thank you heartily. We
were afraid that our strong point, 'The President has
kept us out of war,' might have been vulnerable.
You fortify it. All we need to do now is to tell the
voter that your speech means you would have gone, to
war with Mexico, that you would have gone to war
with Germany, and that you would have taken sides
in the Belgium controversy. We are perfectly will
ing to abide by the verdict of the American vote on
such questions.
The New York Morning Telegraph terms Mr. Root's effort
to suggest the desire of conservatives like Mr. Root
placate Roosevelt by adopting his quarrel with the Central
Powers and making it their own." The New York Globe, In
dependent, finds it "amazing" that Mr. Root "does not per
ceive the antagonism to the President's lack of idealism with
respect to Belgium requires him to approve the President's
idealism with respect to Mexico." The New York Evening
Post, also independent, answers Mr. Root on every point and
for one thing reminds him that the Lusitania ease. "Is on the eve
of settlement. It will apparently be settled u]>on much the
same terms—tho in a shorter time—as President Grant settled
the murder of Americans on the Virginius in 1873.
The Philadelphia Record rather pertinently suggests that
With three guarantors directly engaged in the case of Bel
gium, and two more involved in the war, what could have been
more futile than a diplomatic note from Washington telling the
Prussian General Staff that it ought not to do so? The only
possible effect would have been to destroy our influence with
Germany by giving the impression that we are on the side of
the Allies
I
* »
« «
to
» »
« <
and the Record further definitely states that Mr.
Root "has made the most immoral speech that has been heard
in the United States since the Civil War.
Opinion of German-American editors charges Root with
unfairness. The Cincinnati Volksblatt says: "He censures
the invasion of Belgium, but omits to mention the violation of
Greecian neutrality. His unfairness especially becomes ap
parent when he tries to make the Lusitania incident a cause of
war, while lie utterly disregards the outrageous violations of
American rights and the national dignity by England.
« »
y y
99
WHAT ROOSEVELT WOULD HAVE.
Do you want Roosevelt! If you do, hearken to the condi
tions imposed by that gentleman, at Trinidad, British West In
dies, in which he emphatically declined to be a candidate in the
Massachusetts primaries, stating:
"I will not enter into any fight for the nomination" the
colonel says, "and will not permit any factional fight to be made
in my behalf. Indeed it would be a mistake to nominate me
unless that country had in its mood something of the heroic,
unless it feels not only like devoting itself to ideals, but to the
purpose measurably to realize those ideals in America.
"Do not nominate me unless the country has in its mood
_
» >
something of the heroic," says Mr. Roosevelt, and in spirit
adds that the nation must bid for war and then he will accept
the position of leader. No milksop tendencies in Teddy's
family, it is rule or ruin, might makes right and gun powder
cures all ills.
To continue with his announcement he further heroically
asserts that "this is one of the rare times which come only at
long intervals in a nation's history when the action determines
the life of the generations that follow. Such times were those
from 1776 to 1789, in the days of Washington, and from 1858 to
1865, in the days of Lincoln.
It is for us today to grapple with the tremendous nation
al and international problems of our own hour in the spirit and
with the ability shown by those who upheld the hands of Wash
ington and Lincoln.
What a direct opposite is the Ex-President's statement
from the cool, guarded and cautious statements of the great
Washington and the great emancipator Abraham Lincoln,
whose every act in service of their country was devoid of the
sensational. How different the retiring disposition of Wash
ington as compared with Roosevelt,—the Washington of Val
ley Forge who wept and prayed over the conditions of his
ragged hosts,—or of the noble martyred Lincoln whose first
words to the bleeding South at the close of the great civil war
were:
< <
y y
With malice toward none and charity for all, with firm
ness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive
on to finish the work w r e are in; to bind up the nation's w'ounds;
to care for him w 7 ho shall have borne the battle, and for his
widow 7 and his orphans; to do all which may achieve and cher
ish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and all nations.
How different the words of Lincoln than those of his more
bold successor, Theodore Roosevelt, the former recommending
that the nation "do all which may achieve and cherish a just
and lasting peace among ourselves and all nations," and the
latter bidding for war and urging the need of something of the
heroic.
< 6
y y
Which bleeding nation of Europe would Theodore have us
assail at this time! What honor have we to maintain that has
been degraded? Who has betrayed his country? What nation
of Europe at war has not besmiched its honor by ineffable
dishonor? What debts have the dead men paid or the destruc
tion reimbursed?
When war begins all honor ends and dishonor begins. To
those who are troubled with blood lust we would recommend
Roosevelt.
WHY AND BY WHOM IS LOUIS D. BRANDEIS OPPOSED?
Who is Louis D. Brandeis, termed "The most liked and
most hated man at the bar in America," appointee of President
Wilson to the bench of the United States Supreme Court, and
whom some allege is no proper choice to fill the position be
cause the people do not want him? What crime or wrong has
he committed? Why the dislike and opposition!
To begin with Brandeis was a graduate of the public
schools of Kentucky and graduated from Harvard law school
at the age of 20 and paid his way by tutoring. By the time he
was 30 years old he was the leading light among Boston law
yers and since has gained national fame in his presentation of
cases of public interest, and with his rise he took cases for the
public and charged no fee. One particular instance was in ad
justing the gas rates for the city of Boston and he succeeded in
driving gas down to 80 cents and his suggestions as to matters
of efficiency followed by the gas company drove dividends up
in spite of the fact that gas went down.
In acting as attorney for great industrial corporations in
stead of voicing and excusing corporate wrongs he has on the
part of his clients, acknowledged their shortcomings and work
ed to right the wrong. An instance in this regard is brought
to mind when he. represented the shoe machinery company
against the employes of the company, realized that the
pany was in the wrong and moved to correct and did correct
the wrong.
Likewise in representing the. public in the effort to reduce
railroad rates before the United States Commerce Commission
he honestly admitted that a raise in rates was just in some in
stances and a raise was granted, at the same time procuring a
reduction in rates where the same were justified. And in this
same instance he made the assertion that the railroads through
inefficient methods wasted millions, and his statement has
since been verified by the railroads which on investigation and
correction have saved immense sums in operating expenses by
stopping the leaks and waste.
He fought against the merger of the Boston and Maine
with the New Haven Railroad, stating the evil, lost the con
tention he supported and again was vindicated upon the revela
tion of the rank affairs and management of this big railroad
merger.
as
com
He has used his influence and knowledge in working for
better labor conditions and has particularly lent his influence
in defense of women's labor laws. He. has been exceptionally
successful in adjusting differences between employers and
ployees. In no case has he been proven to be a wrongdoer, al
though the fact that he has firmly come out for the right,
whether or not his employer or client was in the wrong has
earned the charge that he has double dealed. These instances
and many others of like nature may be cited and for these, he is
opposed.
em
He is opposed for the reason that he, has stood for the
masses in the encroachment of privilege. That he has brought
about efficiency where inefficiency existed in corporate man
agement. That he has a mind that in its great brilliancy and
quick perception discovers great evils, and that he has the
courage to point out the same. That he has refused to lend his
great mind and legal ability to great capitalist interests for
mere monetary legal retainer.
a
For all these faults, if faults
they are as alleged by some, he is condemned. Had he like
Elihu Root or Philander Knox only accepted service of great
financial interests, and slavelike performed their will he would
today be hailed as the. greatest lawyer in the United States.
As one of the common people what think you of the quali
fications of Louis D. Brandeis to sit on the Supreme Bench of
the highest court of the nation and safeguard the nation's in.
terest, in judicial interpretation of the constitution and laws
enacted thereunder!
PROBABLY THE BREAKING OF MEXICO'S DARK NIGHT
Like the mills of the gods, the government of the United
States moves slowly, moves even reluctantly, but it never turns
back. It has never turned back yet, once its hand was put to
the plow. It has moved now to take Villa and his crew dead
or alive, and so Villa's hour has struck. It has moved to do
something more and better than that, we think, and that is to
remain in Mexico until all the present pestiferous broods have
been suppressed, and the inocent and pacific and kindly people
of that distracted country are relieved and given a new chance
to pursue their allotted ways in the security and orderliness
that is their inherent right.
The Washington authorities correctly assert that the
movement is only for punitive purposes, as a means of assuring
the national frontiers from a repetition of the raids and dang
ers to which they are now exposed, as no lawful reason exists
for interfering with the Carranza regime in those sections
where it exercises power. But the fact is that such an expedi
tion as is now being put under way cannot do its work without
establishing a certain authority that will be hard to relinquish
except at the end of a period of pacification and restoration!
Meantime Carranza's sovereignty and prestige will have been
so impaired by the operation of foreign troops within his coun
try that it will seem impossible for him to hold up his head
again as first chief, or any other sort of chief.
Primarily, Villa is not going to be as easily taken as the
United States soldiery seem to think, unless, of course, his
men mutiny and deliver him over to his pursuers. It cannot be
know whether he will flee to the mountains or effect a juncture
with the Zapata brothers, but most probably he will prefer to
remain a free lance, rather than trust himself to the doubtful
hospitality of those who may not care to risist a U. S. army
in his behalf. Whether he does one of the other, or in what
ever course he. may adopt, his resourcefulness may be counted
upon to lead the Americans a long and wearying chase. This
will mean that the country must be subordinated to the pur
poses of military operations, and military operations know no
law except the. law of doing the work in hand. To a large ex
tent, under the most favorable circumstances, the country must
come under American military dominance, which will be
tended and increased by various developments growing out of
these conditions. But the most favorable circumstances
scarcely be expected to prevail, since the Mexicans are not that
sort of people and the conditions are such as to put them at
their worst instead of their best.
In short, incidents similar to that which led to the occupa
tion of Vera Cruz and now to the punitive expedition may very
reasonably be expected to develop in this more aggravated
situation, that will lead to the extension of the American pro
visional authority throughout the republic, in spite of Wash
ington's expectations and declarations to the contrary. Wash
ington had never intended or desired to cross the border, or to
occupy Vera Cruz, but its purposes all came to naught because
of new 7 facts which it could not foresee of control. There is
infinitely more, reason to apprehend that it must take further
steps which it had not intended to take in the present operation
than there was that the occasion for taking the present steps
would ever arise.
We may reasonably expect, then, that the breaking of the
day upon Mexico's dark night has begun, and that a mere
punitive expedition—necessary as it may have become—is the.
least worthy part of another great and historical benefaction
the American nation is about to render to the peace, progress
and civilization of less fortunate races, as well as to the world
at large.—Lewiston Tribune.
A few days ago the Republicans were much elated by the
address of Senator Elihu Root, made at a state convention of
New York Republicans, in which he scathingly criticised the
foreign and Mexican policies of President Wilson. A few days
later in the U. S. senate Senator J. Ham Lewis of Illinois pre
sented the record of Senator Root, while in the senate, showing
that the New York solon at every point had endorsed the. posi
tion of the president. When in the senate Root was big enough
to be a statesman. When talking politics to his party cohorts
he needs must be a hypocrite.—Twin Falls Chronicle.
A dispatch from Portland last week states that of 30 saw
mills located along the Columbia river, 25 were reported in
operation now, and that this has given employment to 10,000
men. Of the, five remaining, all but two will open next week.
Heavens, what disastrous times we do have under a Democratic
administration!—Enland Empire News.
There hasn't been a case of rabies in the newspapers of
this week. Press agents are growing derelict. Wouldn't it
make, you mad!"—Pocatello Tribune. Yes perhaps the Tri
bune. Its editor acts mad all of the time. No one is better
qualified to act as
thrower.
own
ex
can
«<
rabies specialist" than the Trib squib
«I
From the noise coming from Pocatello in ranting over
Jerry Day subsidizing the Chronicle, the impression would seem
fixed that the objector seems to think that one subsidized
paper in Pocatello is sufficient, without Jerry coming in
adding a second. Guess again Sumner.
No longer can there be any doubt about the horrors
war. Garet Garrett, correspondent of The Times, writes th»*
the cost of living in Berlin is as high as it is in New York.—Ne*
York Morning Telegraph.
The more certain the prospect of Justice Hughes' refus»j
to run, the stronger the support he gets from Republican uu
Progressive, would-be candidates.—Wall Street Journal.
George E. Crum's announcement comes as a pertiment
minder of the Ferdinand Enterprise statement that it will ta*?
more than a "Crum" to beat Alexander.
of
re*