Washington sentinel., 1901-04-27
TERMS
NEUTRALITYLAWS N VS.
The "EVeninR Star" Comes to the
Presidents AID,

The "EVeninR STAR Comes to the
Presidents AID.
The article in last weeks SENTI-
MEL commenting unfavorably on
the Administrators failure to en-
force neutrality regarding the sale
and shipment OF supplies for the
British army IN South Africa has
spurred Mr.. McKinley's Washing
ton organ, the EVeNfng Star, to an
effort to lessen the odium attach
ing to the President for his neglect
Of plain duty. The organ seizes
upon the purchase of $50, 200, 900
OF England's new loan by Ameri-
can capita lists as a vindication Of
the Presidents course. 1t says:
SULzKRIsM AND THE WAR LOAN.
II is but fair to assume that the Hon.
VIM, Sulzer and those who take their
readings OF interns tionaI law from him
are following closely the details of the
floating of the new British war loan.
There is a very pat text in the matter
from their viewpoint for another howl
about the violation OF neutrality obliga-
tIons, The bidding has been lively. The
loan, indeed, will be big success. In
vestors everywhere bave shown an
esgerness Tor paper which has so much
security behind it. Americans have
been allotted a large block, and the
cable states That applications on French
account" were considerable.
Applications from France for part of
this loan1 Isn't France neutral as be-
N ,en the British and the Boerse But If
her people were Ia position openly to
take sides would they not take the side
OF the Boers1 Wasn't the reception
accorded by them to Mr. Kruger of the
most enthusiastic description What
sort of talk is this, therefore, about
"applications on French account" for
part Of this loan, when the money is to
be expended by Great Britain in further
dkdlu1A DO~Aol ID AldA
neutrality On the contrary, is 1t not
openly aiding and abetting Great
Britasn1 Is not, indeed, money in such
circumstances and Tor such purposes
contraband of war;
Anc what right has even Pierpont
Morgan, who seems TO be so heavily
loaded with money that he is able to
take flyer in everything, to go to the
aid Of Great Britain in this way1 The
temptation from the purely sordid view
point Is, we may admit very strong.
But should he be permitted to embrace
itr Does not the United States pretend
to be neutral as between the British and
the Boersf And shall any citizen OF this
country, simply for the purpose OF for
warding his own personal fortunes, lend
money TO Great Britain to finish up her
very difficult job in South AfricaP The
decision Of Judge Parlange at New
Orleans in the mule case would appear
to cover the point and to permit the
investment, but that has been received
with such dislavOr by the Sulzerites it
may be advisable to go into the whole
question again
Money is everything to Great Britain
at this time. II will buy mules, ammu-
milton, rifles. cannon, foodstufis' will
pay off men already iD her service, and
induce others to enlist. Stop her sup.
plies, and YOU paralyze her fighting arm.
Help increase them, and you strengthen
her tor what is still before her in South
Africa Should capitalists in any neutral
country therefore be permitted to take
her paper and refill her strong box2 To
repeat the question, is not money in
such a case contraband OF war; One
could wish 10 hear Mr.. Sulzer argue this
point somewhere before a full bench.
The VERY pat text" furnished
by the success OF the new British
war loan is but proof OF the cordial
sympathy existing between the
money powers and the Admins
tration. The floating OF the loan
gave the former an opportunity,
by subscribing to a part OF it, tc
demonstrate to England that the
howl over the shipment OF mules
did not come from the A.dministra.
tion's ranks. 1t was not necessary
that such an extreme step, which
involves financial loss to our in,
vestors, should have been taker
to prove Republican sympathy fol
England in her present embarrass
ments. Ii was we'll known OF
which side the Administration
stood.
From the beginning OF the wa
the desire oil our Government 4
further English aims has been 81
disgustingly exhibited in this un
holy strife that such a stanch advo
cate OF Mr.. MeKinley's FIRST elec
tion as Hon. Webster Davis re
signed his Office In disapproval O