New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-04-18

neutral public opinion. II sets forth
the object for tchich the committee
is ,corkino. NTH an explanation OF
the methods By which. II charges,
the German publicists fdlsify and
gGrbie the erjderce they present.
I.
Our aim Is simple: we address our
selves TO the neutral countries, and we
ask them TO be so good as 10 listen
TO what we believe ought to be said by
US about the present war. the condi-
tions in which it began. the moral d.
rection of the armies facing each
other, the methods used against US. and
the mentality which these methods be
tray. After hearing US. let them con-
front our testimony with that Of our
sdversaries, and then judge.
The idea Of speaking on the subject
would not have occurred 10 our minds
II Germany had not forestalled us.
We thought that the part OF the bel
ligerents was 70 act. not TO speak. But
little by little we heard in France that
the enemy did not observe the same
reticence, and that a vast campaign had
been undertaken among neutrals IN
particular. OF course, we are aware
that in many cases the unenlightened
indiscretion Of this propaganda has
harmed the cause il was meant 70
serve. Sensible people realized easily
that so much artifce and violence were
not necessary 70 defend the Right and
the Truth!
And yet experience has long taught
that words, always the same, daily re-
peated. with an insistence that nothing
discourages, will finally make an i'm
preston in spite of everything, If no
contradictory words are heard.
But if in this respect we had to fol-
low the example of Germany, we have
refrained from adopting her methods.
TO reach her end, Germany, with her
usual lack Of judgment, has not hest
tated TO use every weapon to hand
yelled insinuations; historical state
ments, innocent Of footnOtes, allowing
the reader 70 criticise and verify them;
imperative affirmations Of lies or doubt
full facts. alterations or superdextrous
combinations of the eXts-everythlng
has served. We owed it to our cause
and we owed it to neutrals TO proceed
quite differently. Convinced that our
cause and that of the truth are one, We
did not need for its defence TO make
use Of so many Vaccinations; we had
only TO be exact and truthful.
This is why we have been careful
10 recruit our committee among men
of science only. philosophers, histou-
ans. jurists. philologists, trained by
the very exercise of their professions TO
be on their guard against themselves
against the suggestions Of sentiment
and prejudice in their search OF the
truth.
But the best way Of emphasizing the
difference between the two methods Is
TO show them applied to some partlcu-
lar cases.
One OF our books shall facilitate the
comparison. II is entitled "Who Want
ed War ?" BY NM. Durkheim and Denis.
At the very moment IL was being edited
in France an article on the same sub
ject appeared in New York, inspired, If
not written, by DR.. Dernburg. the I'M
official smbas sador Of the German gov
crnment in the United States. At any
rate. he declared he took the response
bility therefor. The study is entitled
"A German Review of the Evidence.
Thus we have the means of seeing both
methods applied to the same problem.
The French authors having to treat
a question Of history simply followed
the historical method, careful always
10 observe exactly chronological order
and noting day by day, and even, IN
certain moments, hour by hour, what
every nation did for or against peace.
In this fashion they ran no risk of ar
ranging the facts too cleverly In a
manner most favorable 10 their cause.
The recital showed that not day
elapsed since the crisis broke upon
the world without some effort being
made 10 prevent war.
Very different was the method fol-
lowed by Dr.. Dernburg. lie did not
apply himself TO retrace the facts IN
their natural succession, bat began by
setting forth a thesis, which is:
Russia has wanted war from the be-
ginning. and England has not fought
this aggressive disposition. but has
rather encouraged It, either by du-
phcity or imbeclhty.'
Then TO prove the proposition thus
advanced he chose among the dlplo-
matte collection the papers or frag-
ments of papers which appeared 20 him
most favorable TO his demonstration.
The others he does not take into &C
count. Moreover, he does not arrange
in their chronological order the facts
thus selected, but he lays them out IN
the manner which seems to him 20
serve his purpose best. lie skips i'm
mediately from an event which has
taken place on July "a to an event OF
July q, just as If nothing had hap
pened in the interval; then he comes
back to the 25th TO spring again as far
as the 2sth. He goes up and down the
10 n a .
cause.
BY such n method there IS no evi
dence which cannot be contested, NJ
paradox TO which a speclous appear
ance cannot be given. In the first
place. one is at liberty 20 omit embar
RAISING facts. Moreover, as all The
facts related are detached from all OF
those that precede, accompany or fol
low them, that is, OF all that can give
them their true significance, II is very
easy TO give them any sense wanted. We
know what becomes of q phrase scpa
rated from the context which enhght
ems and determines it: 1t becomes 6
thing mallcabe and plastic which may
be moulded a. will.
And this is the very thing which Or
Dernburg did. For example, he wanted
10 demonstrate that England did moth
ing TO prevent the war. The demon
stration would not have been easy, for
most Of the attempts made had pro-
ceeded from England. DR.. DernburG
had rather keep silent about them. Al
most does he alludc 20 them super
ficially here and there. The man who
knew nothing of the days that preceded
the outbreak Of war could never sus-
pect by reading Dr. Dernburg all that
Sir Edward Grey did 10 stay the con-
fict.
There are even some significant dec
larations made by England to Ger
many Of which not a word Is told, pre-
ciseiy because they testify without pos
sible contestation TO the resolutely
A.. D..A.rh .rn.-nr.r, N. ~ ~