New-York tribune., 1914-11-17
SHOULD WE REMAIN NEUTRAL?
A Critic of England Urges Us to Stand
by Our Time-Honored Policy.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Professor Howe's letter printed
n yesterdays Tribune and entitled
should We Remain Neutral? ?" is one Of
the most audacious expressions Of opln-
ion get aired in the press. As If there
had not been enough blood shed.
enough horror, Every country that
keeps out Of this war Is reading les
son to humanity and helping the cause
Of peace. Furthermore. every student
of United States history believes that
George Washington knew what he was
talking about when he advised the
country he had fought for. and whose
government he tried 10 establish on
firm and enduring basis, 10 avoid alh-
ances and entanglements with any Eu-
ropcan power. II is temerity indeed for
any one 20 dare suggest reversing the
policies upon which the very founda-
ti0ns of this republic stand.
And then, when one examines the ar
guments upon which Professor Howe
bases his outrageous proposal, one tnds
as much logic and sense in them as
was shown by the hen in the fable who
thought it her duty to alarm the world
that the sky was falling. His entire
reason lor. one might better term II,
imagining) rests upon the supposltion
that the Germans want TO rule the
earth On a mere suppositlon, and the
fabric of fancy he has built upon II,
he would plunge q whole nation into
war regardless Of justice, right or the
investigation of evidence. He does not
take the trouble TO enlighten his read
IL oh J. fe
position rests. but perhaps, If ! may
hazard guess. IL Is upon the writings
of one military crank Bernhard,
whose sole offence was that he tried.
i'm an agony of spirit 20 square the
philosophy and ethics of the world with
its military practices. War experts, As
q rule. Lord Kitchener, for example, DO
not care to tackle this problem.
Theirs not 10 reason why, theirs but
90 do and die" II is left 20 the survlv-
ors % attribute a motive that will
make a good moral showing on paper.
l. II possible that Professor Howe
can be acquainted with the history Of
Europe up to date without realizing
that every move that has been made on
the political chessboard has been die
lated by a policy Of lf-aggrandiZe-
mcnt and the extension of national
power and influence? Why must Ger
many be singled out as the one exam
pie? She has shown the least "eXpan-
siveness" of any. Who is TO prove that
England does not want 20 rule the
earth, or that the Gar has not dreams
Of world dominion Their cOnquests
during the last hundred years would
seem 10 point 20 this conclusion. While
England and Russia have been mel
ding in various parts of the world
the Kaiser has been rapidly building up
a wonderful ration at home through
the stimulus of education and industry
among his people. What Germany has
achieved has been accomplished
through enlightened social legislation
and unremitting industry, not by eX-
plotting colonies.
But German mllltarism you eXclaimi
Yes. here again, why should Germany
be singled out as the chief offender? =?
Should she have abolished her arma-
ments in the face of Russia's barbaric
military system on one side, and the
glorious armee and England's navy on
the other? II America had gathered
together all her wild red Indians. given
them land and keep, with hereditary
tenure. with the provision that they
devote their whole lives 10 the tram
ing for and practice of ferociouS and
savage warfare, we would now have an
institution m thls country comparable
20 that Of the Russian Cossacks. Ger
many's mobilization took place after,
not before. Russia and France had al
ready threatened her borders.
l. too, may claim the right TO MAKE
some supposltions. As 1t has been my
custom 10 spend my vacations IN Eu-
rope, each summer IN different coun-