New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-03-21

.n,rdianship Of the narrow seas. |
ill frankly own that share in
,,sir disappointment The English
,.s,ins. however, is not one Of
,,sentment. 1t is one of disappoint-
ant pure and simplei in which
,,,nrise plays a great part. | share
,,s surprise also. cannot under
,.snd the grounds of such American
Sseontent as has been described to us
10 the cable. Think, if there were no
able. how TRANQUILITY matters might
,roeeed. But that is past praying for.
TIE English had fair warning of
chat was in store for them at the
,,nds Of President Wilson. They had
~ reason to suppose that the Ameri-
,sn people would support him in his
;,tervention in behalf Of Germany, nor
~ I suppose they did, or do. or will
sppport him in that effort. True, it is
always being said that we support all
Presidents in all foreign policies. But
We do not. never yet heard that the
American people had surrendered their
right Of Judgment upon the policy or
.hs acts Of their chief servant who
,oss by the name of President A
president is one wto presides. But
he authority Of a presiding officer is
strictly limited, and every atom Of il is
derived from the people themselves.
they are the masters. He is the SER
tsrt Is the will of the servant TO
nrevail against the master? That is
rot the American doctrine.
The true doctrine is far different.
L Is after the die is cast that the
President is entitled TO the support Of
me people Until II is cast the people,
and the American people more than
any other. reserve the right of judg-
ment. Il is not only a right. 1t is
duty. -.
| will not theorize. ! will deal with
f,rts. I will take the latest instance.
Did we. or did we not, acquiesce in
President Wilson's policy toward Mex
leo. VIC all know that, as people,
No did not. Ii was q policy-or an
attitude. for policy there was none
which az every stage was criticised BY
4 great body of public opinion; as II
ought 10 have been; and condemned;
AZ il ought 10 have been. Il was an
attitude which threatened TO lead, and
might well have led. 10 war. But not
ior that reason did we uphold proceed
ings in thought mischievous and stupid.
II the IT had come, then We should
have held up the Presidents hand.
There could be no two parties then.
But till IL came we maintained and
praetised the doctrine of independent
thought and opinion.
! hope. therefore, we may dismiss
that fallacv. We are dealing the
President is dealing and for seven
months has dealt with problems in
fnitely grave and infinitely more com
rlex than those Of Mexico. Have the
American PEOPLE during those seven
months surrendered their right of
private Judgment? lave they said
ditto to Mr.. Wilson? We all know
ihev have not. MIR. Wilson's attitude
durino the whole Of that time. and in
nearly every crisis that has arisen,
has been such as 70 make his "neu-
ralty' benevolent TO Germany. / have
Sc, forth the particulars again and
again. Now, at a moment more deli
cate perhaps than any other. are we
70 turn our back upon ourselves, &C
tept Mr. Wilson Is an intallible ~ lde.
and throw the weight of american
inon on the side of Germany?
DO not believe it.
suppose must admit that il was
NJ. Asqu..h who gave Mr.. Wilson his
chance. In all respects but one the
Prime Minister'S speech in the House
Of Commons on Monday was a speech
worthy Of the hour in which il was de-
lVered The defect in it may have
been inevitable. | cannot say. We do
rot and can not know all the circum-
stances. But, inevitable or not, the
zap was one through which Mr.. Wilson
made his plunge. The Prime Minister,
after long consideration and long ne
collation. with the allies Of Great Brlt-
ain mad 10 announce the measure by
which he proposed TO meet the new
German piracy. England and France
Russia having at the moment no ell
.fectlye sea power outside of the Baltic
had come 20 a momentous agree
ment. They had agreed that access
70 Germany by sea should be closed.
IN strict law there is, perhaps, one way
and one only, by which sea approaches
10 an enemy's coast can he closed, and
that is. technically, by blockade. But
Mr AsQuith did not use the word
blockade It's omission was Mr.. VIII
sons opportunity; its omission is also
me basis Of such complaints IN the
Press as have reached US on this side.
Now, whether the Prime Minister
had blockade in mind as the basis and
Justification Of his present sea policy,
We DO not yet know. If he had, we do
not know why he avoided the word.
American critics urge with great force
that only by such use of ships and
teets as would in effect constitute a
blockade could he make his declara-
uon either In accord with the old rules
o. international law or practically ell
!ectiye Which only adds to the diff
Guilty Of comprehending why he lett II
cut.
Mr.. Asquith is lawyer, with great
knowledge Of the principles OF IN
ternstional law He is a Prime Min
,,sster duNng whose rule-for II the
Aing reigns il is the Prime Minister
VINO rules and governs-he has mad
egsln and again, IN crises always dlIn-
gut and sometimes of gravity un-
snown for hundred years, TO apply
nose principles in practice. We may be
sure that he knew perfectly well, and
had considered and discussed with his
colleagues in the Cabinet and with his
allies, the difficulties which would arise
nom the attempt TO set up blockade
without calling it blockade. Why did
he do il?
=, Well, without attempting to answer
wat question completely, | offer you
vhe or two suggestions which may
arrow light on the problem.
Inc first is President Wilson himself,
now many days is it since Presi-
uht Wilson undertook 10 make him
ven the agent if not the accomplice
VI Germany IN a proposal Of black
TMnl to Great Britain? | do not