New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-02-10
President Roosevelt's Peace
Plans Already Frustrated.
Thinks Ex-Atta che.

Of Questions for discussion at the international
congress which is TO take place in the late
spring or carly summer at The Hague, 1t is
already apparent that the primary object which
President Roosevelt had IN view when he first
suggested. two years ago. the organization OF
this conference will be frustrated For II is
practically decided that there can be no discus
sion Of the question Of disarmament or Of the
Drago Doctrine In one word. the entire time
and energies Of the congress Will be devoted to
the discussion OF the laws of war. 10 the nodih-
cation and extension Of international agree
ments upon the subjects OF neutrality, contra
band, maintenance OF interned troops, and the
belligerent status OF regular armed forces; In
short, the conference of peace VIII be 10 all
intents and purposes one Of war.
It is Just as well that this should be clearly
understood IN America For the self-imposed
yet weu-intentioned mission Of ". T Stead. who
possesses unrivaled means of publicity. is cal
culated to create serious Interpretations con-
corning the character and the prospects Of the
impending congress. Mr. Stead, whom every
one here knows as the former editor Of 1.-THE
Pail Mall Gazette" and as the present actual
owner and editor OF the English Review of
Reviews" claims TO represent the views Of Sir
Edward Grey. the Secretary Of State for Foreign
Affairs. and Of Sir Henry Campbell Banuerman.
the Prime Minister Of the British Empire. But
while they. like all others who have the in
terests OF humanity and Of peace at heart, must
sympathize with the objects which Mr.. Stead
has in view-namely. the prevention Of war and
The disarmament of the nations-yet it is i'm
possible TO believe that any practical statesman
can indorse the methods by means OF which he
proposes TO accomplish his altogether utopian
aims. in fact, SIR Edward Grey on being asked
at the Foreign Office about the utterances of
Mr. Stead disclaimed ali responsibility for them
ana for the intentions ascribed to him in
nection With the Hague conference. Indeed It
may be questioned whether Mr.. Stead's tour OF
the European CO pitfalls and his visit to America
3 few weeks hence viii not have the effect Of
inpairing rather than promoting the cause Of
peace by binding popular sentiment to the real
issues that viii come before the congress with
= likelihood OF settlement
Before, however, going any further into the
question Of Mr.. Stead's mission. It may be as
well TO make brief mention of that Of Prlvy
Councillor de Martens, the eminent Russian au-
thority on the subject Of international law. who
was one Of the colleagues Of Count Witte in the
negotiations for the treaty Of peace between
Russia and Japan at Portsmouth, n. H, two
years ago. The mission Of Privy Councillor de
Martens, differing from that OF Mr. Stead is an
entirely official one. and has been undertaken on
behalf Of the Gar and by his personal direc-
1lDl II IS 10 De regretted InaI MS tour SnOOlQ
he restricted to Berlin. Vienna, Paris Rome and
London and that he should find It impossible
10 visit Washington. especially IN view Of the
role played by President Roosevelt in promoting
the forthcoming congress For the strong per-
sonality OF the Chief Magistrate Of this country
and his sincere enthusiasm IN the cause Of peace
could not fail to create a profound impression
upon the mind of the Cars emissary. The
purpose Of Professor de AIartens's trip IS 20
settle the main points Of the programme Of the
conference by learning more Of the true views
Of the great powers than can be obtained by
correspondence or through the ordinary dipIo-
matte channels After the conclusion Of his
mission Professor de Martens viii report its
result directly TO the Car. and thereupon Rus
sia, Jointly with Holland. viii issue the final
programme TO be submitted to the conference
and limit the scope of its discussion.
At the time Of this writing Professor &c Mar
lens has already visited Berlin and Paris, and
has found that Germany and France are abso-
iute1y opposed to the principle OF the Limitation
OF ornaments and that Germany is equally in
disposed to admit Of the discussion Of the Drago
Doctrfne-that is TO say. the question as 10
whether a nation may lawfully use force to
compel another nation TO pay its debts. The
attitude of Germany and France in these mat
ters virtually eliminates all possibility OF their
being brought up for debate at the congress-
since II has been concluded that the raising of
questions where agreement is known to be i'm
possible viii be Of a nature TO create dtscord TO
obstruct the attainment OF real results. and pos
sibly TO wreck the congress. It is true that
France and Italy have indicated that they
would be ready TO discuss the problem Of dis
armament If in the course Of the congress or
toward it's close there was unanimous consent
on the part Of the other powers to It's being SUBJ
united to the delegates. But inasmuch as Ger
many has announced beforehand that under no
circumstances VIII she yield In the affair, this
concession on the part OF France and Italy is OF
little or value. beyond indicating the good
VIII OF these two powers toward the cause Of
peace. Il stands to reason that France who
considers her frontiers threatened by Germany.
cannot dream OF reducing her ornaments until
Germany leads the way, while the Kaiser, who,
like his illusfrious predecessor on the throne Of
Prussia. Frederick the Great is occasionally
threatened with coalition Of foreign powers
for the purpose Of bringing pressure to bear on
Germany. naturally sees in the maintenance Of
his army and navy at their present strength a
guarantee OF the political and economic inde-
pendence Of bis empire It must be thoroughly
borne In mind that for any decision Of the con-
5erencs 20 be effective Il must be unanimous.
Thersfors II e. useless to compromise the pros-
poets Of accomplishing any good results at all by
insisting upon the presence on the programme
Of questions upon which no agreement Ia pos
Efbie.
There are so many important problems which
require settlement by the congress that II ia
dificult to blame those statesmen who fear to
5eopa-dizs the hoped-for results by admitting
for discussion issues on which there can be no
agreement. Thus. In addition TO the features of
the programme above mentioned It Is absolutely
necessary that some understanding should be
reached at The Hague concerning the extent of