Press Opinion of the Allies

BRITISH COMMENT.

A.G. Gardiner, editor of The London Daily News, writing in that paper on June 12, says the rupture between President Wilson and Mr. Bryan is one of the great landmarks of the war. He goes on:

Whatever other significance the event may have, it is conclusive evidence of the failure of German diplomacy in America. The Kaiser has made many miscalculations about nations and about men, but no greater miscalculation than that which he has made in regard to President Wilson and the United States.

He is not alone in that. There has been a good deal of ignorance on the same subject in this country. In the early stages of the war there was a mischievous clamor against the United States in a section of the press, which has never quite got rid of the idea that America is only a rather rebellious member of our own household, to be patronized when it does what we want and lectured like a disobedient child when it does not.

President Wilson has assumed in these ill-informed quarters to be a timid academic person, so different from that magnificent tub thumper, Roosevelt, who would have been at war with Mexico in a trice, and would, it was believed, have plunged into the European struggle with or without an excuse.

If there was misunderstanding here on this subject, we cannot be surprised that the Kaiser blundered so badly. He, too, believed in the schoolmaster view of Woodrow Wilson. A man who had refused such a golden opportunity of annexing Mexico must be a timid, invertebrate person, who had only to be bullied in order to do what he was told. Moreover, was there not a great German population to serve as a whip for the Presidential blank and see that he did not send the polite, the gracious, the supple Prince von Bülow to Washington?

That courtly gentleman was dispatched to Italy to charm the Italian Nation into quiescence. For the Americans he needed another style of diplomacy, and he sent thither the stout and rather stupid Dernburg to let President Wilson and the Americans know that Germany was a very rough customer and would stand no nonsense from anybody.

It was a fatal blunder, the blunder of a people who had been so blinded by materialism that they do not seem to have so much as the consciousness that there is such a thing as moral strength on earth. No one who had followed with intelligent understanding the career of President Wilson could have doubted that he had to deal with a man of iron, a man with a moral passion as fervid as that of his colleague Bryan, but with that passion informed by wide knowledge and controlled by a masterful will, a quiet, still man, who does not live with his ear to the ground and his eye on the weathercock, who refuses to buy popularity by infinite hand-shaking and robustous speech, but comes out to action from a sanctuary of his own thoughts, where principle and not expediency is his counselor.

It is because no man in a conspicuous position of the democratic world today is so entirely governed by principle and by moral sanctions that President Wilson is not merely the first citizen of the United States, but the first citizen of the world.

The Daily Chronicle says:

President Wilson's note gives Germany every opportunity of saving her face if she desires to do so. Not only is it phrased in the most friendly terms, but it invites a submission of further evidence regarding the Lusitania's alleged guns and even the resumption of negotiations with Great Britain through American intermediacy. Here are the vistas of a negotiation which might keep the diplomatists of Berlin and Washington happily employed till the war is over; only the President insists once more that the submarine outrages must stop while the negotiations are in progress. It is this last point, firmly submitted at the end of the note, which gives significance to the whole. Obviously, without it the note would be nothing but an abdication on the part of the United States, and it is because it is not that Mr. Bryan disapproves it.

We do not question the sincerity of Mr. Bryan's attachment to the cause of arbitration; but it is strange that he does not see what a disservice he does to arbitration by accepting and preaching a travesty of it. When there is litigation between individuals over an alleged wrong, the first condition is that the wrong shall stop for the interim—a result effected through an interim injunction between nations. There is no judge to grant such an injunction. It has to be obtained by mutual consent unless it is obtained by arbitration. It simply means a license to the wrongdoer to continue his wrongdoing for as long as he can make the arbitration last, which, where the time is important, will be all that he wants. To accept such a doctrine, as Mr. Bryan apparently does, is simply to put a premium on the wrongdoing and a very heavy discount on arbitration.

The Morning Post comments as follows:

Mr. Bryan resigned, according to his own explanation, because he thought President Wilson's note to Germany would endanger the cause of peace. It might, therefore, have been supposed that the American note was to be a departure from the previous American policy; but now that President Wilson's note is published we are puzzled to find the reason for Mr. Bryan's action. The note contains nothing new; it merely affirms in a friendly manner the position taken up by the United States—a position founded upon the generally accepted principles of international law. It testates the claim which America has always made, that a belligerent has no right to sink a presumably innocent merchantman and endanger the lives of its crew and passengers, but must first determine the character of its cargo and establish its contraband nature and must secure the safety of the people on board. This is obviously a stand in the cause of humanity. We might call it the irreducible minimum of the rights of neutrals; for it is clear that, if a Government allows its subjects to be slain in cold blood and its ships to be destroyed, it abandons the primary function of a Government.

The Daily Mail says:

The first impression made upon most readers of the new American note to Germany will be, we suspect, that it is extremely polite and quite harmless. They will ask in wonder what Mr. Bryan could have found in it sufficiently menacing to call for his resignation. To many people it will seem that Mr. Bryan altogether misjudged the effect of the American reply. They will find it difficult to believe that any diplomatic dispatch could in the circumstances be more courteous or more restrained. It observes all the forms of international politeness, with, if anything, almost exaggerated punctiliousness.

Yet it is possible that Mr. Bryan is as nearly right as he ever is. The vital passages in the note are those in which the United States Government "very earnestly and very solemnly renews the representations of its note" of May 15, and again asks for assurances that American lives and American ships shall not be endangered on the high seas. In other words, the United States still presses for an official disavowal of the acts of German submarine commanders, still demands reparation for the American lives lost in the Lusitania, and still calls for a promise that no similar outrage will be perpetrated in future.

The Daily Telegraph says:

The note presented to Germany on behalf of the United States Government is a firm and courteous document—the courtesy at least as obvious as the firmness—stating the position of the President very much on the lines expected, and leaving us to wonder even more than we did before why Bryan thought it necessary to resign his Secretaryship. The spirit of the second note is exactly that of the first.

Following is The London Times comment:

The gist of President Wilson's note lies in the last half dozen words and proceeds. It remains to be seen what answer will be made to this categorical demand. The general opinion in the United States appears to be that it will not be a refusal. Germany, it is thought, will begin by making concessions enough to prevent the abrupt conclusion of conversations, and will finally extend them sufficiently to preserve friendly relations with the Republic.

It would be rash to express a decided view, but we shall not be surprised should this forecast prove to be correct. The feeling in Germany is very bitter against the Government and people of the United States; but it seems unlikely that the Government in Berlin will allow the ill-temper of the public to influence its conduct. The semi-official Lokalanzeiger is already deprecating an unfriendly attitude toward the United States. There is nothing in the note to suggest that a policy such as the American newspapers seem to expect from Germany would be doomed to failure. The American people, we are told, are determined to attain their ends, but they welcome every prospect of attaining them by peaceful means.

The note, it is observed, not only does not shut out further conversations, but gives a distinct opening for them by its treatment of von Jagow's renewed intimation that Germany would gladly accept American good offices in negotiations with this country as to the character and conditions of maritime war. The Wilhelmstrasse can discover in this and some other passages material for procrastination if it so desires.

PRAISE FROM CANADA.

The Daily Standard of Kingston, Ont., commenting on June 11, says:

President Wilson's second message to Germany will rank with his first one as a document that at once convinces and convicts—convinces of the sincerity of the President that he is "contending for nothing less high and sacred than the rights of humanity," and convicts the nation to whom it is addressed of being responsible for the fact that the men, women, and children on the Lusitania were sent to their death under circumstances "unparalleled in modern warfare."

The note is not only dignified and statesmanlike, but it breathes a spirit of tolerance and Christianity that is as noteworthy as it is admirable. There is in it not even a suggestion of a threat, no word of bluster, no breath of jingoism. It is sound, sensible, firm, resolute, self-contained, magnanimous even. It does not incite to war, but, instead, appeals to the highest principles of justice and right.

But though the words are conciliatory and the spirit admirable, there is not the least abatement of the insistence upon the principles which the President formulated in his earlier message and laid down for the guidance of Germany and for the protection of the American people. The way is now open to Germany either for peace or for war. The decision is left with her.

FRENCH COMMENT.

The Temps of June 12 says:

Germany must choose between having the services of America in proposing to the Allies a moderation of their blockade, conducted with the strictest humanity, and the cessation of torpedoing neutral ships, the continuation of which exposes Germany to a diplomatic rupture with the United States, if not to war. Assuredly this prospect caused Bryan's resignation.

La Liberté says of the note:

It is in every way worthy of a great country conscious of its dignity, its rights, and its duties. It has not the tone of an ultimatum, since it is couched in courteous terms, but it is energetic, and it requires Germany finally to cease recourse to false expedients.

The Journal des Débats, in discussing the note, says:

The United States, representing in this case the civilized world, places the sacred rights of humanity above considerations of the military order, to which Germany subordinates everything. They are resolved, so far as concerns American subjects, to have those rights respected.

The essence of the note is, first, measures required by humanity must be taken, and afterward, if desired, will come discussions of a new regulation of naval warfare. If Germany insists on putting herself outside the pale of humanity she will suffer the consequences.

ITALIAN COMMENT.

The Corriere della Sera of June 12 compares the attitude of Secretary Bryan to that of former Premier Giolitti, leader of the party which sought to prevent war with Austria. It says Mr. Bryan's action probably will have the same effect in America that Signor Giolitti's intervention had in Italy, and that it will strengthen public opinion in favor of President Wilson.

It will give him greater power in this important moment, defeating men who are ready to lower the prestige and honor of the country.

The Tribuna says:

The United States, the greatest neutral nation, has with this document assumed a special rôle, that is, the defense not of a particular group or interest, but the interest of civil humanity; to guard those principles of common right which above any particular right constitute the sacred patrimony of humanity. She raises her voice, whose firmness is not diminished by the courtesy of the language.

We do not know if Germany will be able to understand the significance, but if she does not she will commit a grave error—the gravest perhaps in the immense series made by her in this war. Mr. Wilson seems to persevere in the hope that Germany will listen to the American admonition. Germany must not forget that the longer the hope the more violent will be the reaction.

The Idea Nazionale says:

The note is not only not a declaration of war or the prelude to a declaration of war, but a species midway of humanitarian sentimentalism and lawyerlike arguments which can have, at least for the present, but one consequence, that of encouraging Germany in intransigentism—that is, the maintenance of her point of view regarding naval warfare.