Der Deutsche correspondent. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1841-1918, 1915-01-15
THE NEUTRALITY OF THE
UNITED STATES.

UNITED STATES.
Before the Mems Club of Martini
Church, South Baltimore, on
Wednesday night Mr.. Karl A.
NJ Scholtz lectured on the war,
It's causes, the attitude of the
pro-English press and on the
neutrality of this country. In
part Mr.. Scholtz said regarding
the main cause of the war and
the neutrality of the United
States:
Germany asked for no extension
of territory, all it wanted was a
chance to do business in the world
on terms equal with all other ma
tions. Hence it supported the open
door policy of the United States
Hence it objected to the arbitrary
division of Morocco whereby Eng
land agreed that France should have
Q free hand in that land and so
shutting out Germany; this brought
the Algeciras incident where it was
made to appear that Germany was
wanton aggressOr.
Through its energy, industry and
intelligence Germany, though not
larger territorially than the State Of
Texas, and compelled to maintain
. tremendous military establishment
because surrounded by rival powers,
developed its manufacture and COM
merce to such an extent rs to become
@ real menace to the continued COM
mercial welfare of Great Britain.
England, consistend to its tradi-
tional policy of not permitting
rival in trade and upon the seas,
policy which led to the wars with
and humiliation Of Spain, Holland
and Fpance, now began to encompass
the destruction of its German COM
petitor. Hence the cessation of its
centuries old enmity with France and
its unnatural alliance with Russia
with which It is in conflict at almost
every point in Asia. So came about
that combination of powers whose
strength and existence originated
tho present conflict.
No, Germany is not answerable
for the war. Alongside the assassin
of Sarajevo stands tho ghost of
Edward the Seventh, stands the fiery
Delcasse and the weak Nicholas, as
the promoting cause of the war.
And what is the position of the
United States? Is it that of an i'm
partial friend. a friend of whom
naught is asked, OF whom naught is
wanted, but that it shall not aid the
other side? No, unfortunately not.
Germany wants nothing and Great
Britain and her allies get everything.
The answer is, that this is not the
result OF design but of circumstances.
But this is not true.
From the very beginning every
doubtful question was resolved
against Germany. We all remember
how the wireless -Germany's
only means OF communication, was
at first shut down and is to this day
censored, the while all cable code
communication is free; how in the
harbors of San Francisco and New
York ships were refused the right to
sail because it was suspected, though
they had properly cleared for a for
cign port, that they might be in
tended to supply some German
cruiser, the while English vessels by
the score were permitted to depart
regardless of what their real desti-
nation or purpose might be.
Millions OF dollars worth Of NUM-
tions Of war are being sold and ex-
ported to the allies, thus we prolong
the war and add to its misery and
bloodshed. Our Anglo-American
press is Mortified at the suggestion
that it would be but true exercise
of neutrality to prevent the shipment
Of arms to the belligerents; they at
once and in chorus declaim that this
would be harsh and unfair to the
Allies, a breach of our treaty obliga-
tions and a violation OF neutrality.
To all of which we can justly though
with little respect for their protein
sions say bosh.
A staple argument advanced by
the said press is that as the Allies
are not as well prepared as the Ger
mans we must aid them with arms.
If this be such a moral question why
not say conversely, that as Germany
is lacking in food stuffs that we will
see to it that Germany shall equally
with the Allies be permitted to re-
ceive our wheat Then comes the
prompt answer: 20, this is so diff
ferent."
The neutrality question as viewed
by the Anglo-American press and
many eminent minds reminds me Of
the story of the darkies who went
out in search of adventure and
chickens. Caesar was busy in the
hen house when for some strange
psych biological reason he stopped
and said; "Pompey you and is both
members Of the church, and don't
you think that taking those chickens
is immoral?" The answer was:
Never you mind the morals. pass
out the chickens" So speaks our
press: Never mind the morals, pass
out the chickens
The text writer's agree that Inter
national law Is an uncertain quanti-
ty depending more upon might than
morals, more upon advantage and
expediency than justice. For nations
at war, lighting for their existence
cannot always stop and stand upon
nicetios. But neutral nations, hav-
ing only commercial and merccnary