The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1915-05-01
BY ROLAND 6. USHER,
Professor Of History, Washington Uni.
verst, Author Of Pan-Germanism,

VefSIt, AutnOF OF TAU-SCVTuaUISUlB
Pan.Amerieanisn,, Etc.
The new peace organizations now
being established over the country
have placed before the American peo-
pie a distinct, practical. immediate is
sue: the use or a popular referendum
as an immediate as we'll as permanent
method of securing peace in Europe.
They demand vote by the people of
the nations concerned on all treaties
before they finally become operative,
and mean literally that no terms OF
peace are to be accepted which the
people at large do not approve. 1t Is
clear that, if war has been caused by
governments against the will OF the
people who wish for peace, these pro-
posals will eliminate the method by
which war and pea1e lave been usual
~ concluded. They would destroy the
machinery
But is the democratic control of the
terms of peace by popular vote feas-
ible? Is the machinery proposed likely
to produce the desired effect-the d.
rection Of policy by popular opinion.
the prevention of action by part Of
the people contrary to the will OF the
majority? The nineteenth century has
given US certain amount of prece-
dents regarding plebiscites and makes
It possible to say with some approx
nation of impartiality that the great
bulk of honest men in this country and
in Europe are not at all willing to ad-
nit that a plebiscite affords a really
accurate indication of popular opinion.
People Favor War.
1t il perfectly clear that the present
policies and the increase Of arma-
ment have been often approved at the
polls: Napoleon Bonaparte and his
methods were more than once accord
ed overwhelming majorities; and most
OF the present cabinets, who are so
largely held responsible for the war,
were put in office and are now sup
pos edly maintained in it by men who
claim to represent popular opinion
expressed at the polls. If the present
constituencies were to vote on the
basis Of the present franchise in Eu-
ropean countries. what ground have
We to expect so Numerically different
a result as that between war and
peace? II the electors with the ballot
in their hands were not capable OF
electing by the present machinery men
who would keep peace, is there much
probability that the same electors will
be better able to Judge the actual diff
ficulties Of an extraordinary complicat-
ed situation that they were to estimate
the capacity, intelligence and policies
OF the present administration?
A further claim, widely believed to
be true. charges the war to the exer-
ton Of undue influence upon the gov
ernments by commercial interests de-
voted to the manufacture Of munitions
OF war. Were it not for them the war
might have been avoided The assump-
ton Is plain that if the control Of war
and peace was in the hands of the cleo
torate, these men would be powerless.
Do we find good ground for such an
assumption In the experience Of nearly
due influence upon the electorate by
corporations and political rings? The
present influence Of wealth upon the
German government Is supposedly due
to the franchise itself Do we see in
the United States, where manhood
suffrage prevails, the interests helpless
and incapable Of furthering their ends
After all, 1t seems reasonably clear
that the real difficulty Is not one Of
machinery. 1t Is the people them
selves who are at fault. They have
now in many countries all the machn-
cry necessary to take control of the
government and its policy. or to have
control, If they had wished, when the
war broke out. If they could be Co