Palisadian. [volume] (Cliffside Park, N.J.) 1906-current, 1915-08-14

signatures were requested-members
of families settled in the United
States for many generations, and
foreign-born citizens belonging by
birth to the most diverse nationalities
have signed the petition. Their
reasons for joining in the movement
are twofold; a considerable number
are DESTROYS of having the trade in
ammunition and arms stopped, be-
cause they believe that it benefits
only the enemies of Germany and
Austria Hungary, and that for this
reason the traffic is unneutral; others
want to see it discontinued on purely
moral grounds.
A lesser group of those who were
invited to attach their signatures
have declined. These also give var,
GUS reasons for their attitude. By far
the largest group declare that they
want the Allies to win, and that they
are not willing to assist in any act
that might make their position more
difficult. They believe that the furn-
ishing of arms is the best means by
which we can assist the cause of the
Allies. Another group, larger than !
supposed it could be, decline because
their business interests are furthered
by the trade in arms. A third, small
group base their objections on ques-
tons of expediency that have been
advocated by certain newspapers.
They consider it unneutral to change
our policy during the progress of the
war, and claim that perhaps at some
other time we might wish to buy
arms and ammunition, and that we
must not create precedent that
might prevent our doing us. None
of those who have been asked have
justified their refusal by moral con-
siderations.
AS citizens of neutral nation, we
must insist that the sympathies with
the Allies or the Central European
powers, which sway the two largest
group of signers and DIRECTORS, are
entirely irrelevant in regard to the
question at issue, which must be de
cided wholly on the basis of Ameri-
can policies. The circumstance that
the traffic in arms and ammunition
does harm to the cause of the Central
powers, and that it helps the Allies,
can be of Importance to us only in
so far as it has bearing upon the
legal question whether we as nation
live up to the requirements of an
honest neutrality.
The trade has assumed such proper
tions that almost every ship of the
allied nations that goes out from our
coasts is laden with weapons of de-
struction that challenge attack.
1t is no longer the business of a few
private citizens, but a factor in our
national economic life, with which we
reckon. 1t is business that may
lead to difficulties, on account of the
measures for self-protection that the
Central powers are driven to adopt.
Thus it has come to be public bust
ness of gravest concern to the State.
Whether these conditions, and the
complete revolution of some of our
industries that it has brought about,
do not involve the neutrality of the
nation, is a matter in regard to which
opinions may differ. 1t is, however,
not the decisive question. If we
want to live up to our professed prin-
ciples of statecraft, we must demand
that our policy be founded on moral
principles; and these forbid the con-
tinuance of the murderous traffic.
l fully agree with those signers of
the petition who claim that pecuniary
gain derived from trade in war ma
terials is immoral We cannot pro-
fess to abhor war and condemn
vociferously those who are held re-
sponsible for the agonies through
which mankind is passing, and at the
same time profit by supplying the
means with which war is conducted.
l read with burning shame that
American-made projectiles are known