New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-02-14


( Zeppelins a little longer and other
surprises will await them.
am not suggesting that theiI
knowledge OF these defensive prepare
tons in and about London will per.
manently deter the German General
staff from attacking London. They
have shown themselves, like the late
Artemus Ward, ready to sacrifice all
their wives relations on the altar OF
their country, or, which TO them 10 the
same thing and more, In the interests
of Prussian militarism. II Is supposed
and from the purely military problem
point of view hoped-that the Zeppe-
Inns will come to London, and come in
force. But IL they should elect 10 con-
tinue their present scheme of strategy
and postpone London. think what tar
gets await them elsewhere. To the men
who destroyed Louvain and cannonsded
the cathedral of Rheims and dropped
bombs on Notre Dame, Of Paris, what
could be a purer ecstasy than to
burn down the Universities Of Oxford
and Cambridge? With what transports
of glee would they crumble into ruins
such cathedrals as York Minister Of
Lincoln or Durham; none very far from
the coast.
Mr. Churchill, so long ago as last
March, in the House Of Commons, at a
time when none of his colleagues be-
lieved in the possibility of war, flung
out this challenge:
1--WE are already in a position OF eff
fective strength in our air service, and
any hostile aircraft-airships or aero
planes-which reached our coast dur
ing the coming year would be promptly
attacked in superior force by q swarm
of very formidable hornets. This Is the
true military protection Of vulnerable
points"
Discretion is not always Mr.. Church
ills strong point, nor perhaps good
taste, but he generally knows what he
is talking about. You will observe.
nevertheless, that he spoke not Of Lon
don specifically, but Of "our coast" as
under sufficient military protection. 1t
was, as is seen to-day, an unlucky
phrase.
If one may judge from the comments
Of the American press, the German con-
spiracy to Germanize the American
mind has not yet blunted either the
moral or military sense of the Ameri-
can people. No British or French COM
ment on the futile savagery" of this
AFRAID Is more severe than the Ameri-
can. But what about the State Depart
ment and the White House? / suppose
they cannot be expected TO express, any
more than they did in the case of Bel
GUM, the horror their occupants must,
in their private capacity, feel st these
outrsges.
But we may still ask why their neu-
trality is so often pro-German? Why
do their scruples, which sleep the
sleep Of death when neutrality is defied
and set at naught by Germans, wake
up when Americans organize themselves
not against Germany but for the relief
of Belgium? In an instructive and ex-
cellent dispatch from 1.-THE Times" New
York correspondent, ] find a statement
that in obedience to the State Depart
ment the American Commission for
the Relief Of the Belgians" has ex-
plunged the word American" from its
title. Mr.. Bryan "was afraid the pres
ence Of the word might impress the
Germans as violation of neutrality"
Is il true? Is 1t credible? Have we
sunk so low that an American may no
longer call himself an American lest
he offend the sensibilities of Germans
or German Americans? Not even for
purposes of charity? Mr.. Bryan has
no warrant of law for this craven and
shameful interference. Why do people
submit to him? Why did Mr.. Schwab
submit to Mr.. Wilson's demand that
he should stop building submarines
for the Allies? It was, Mr.. Wilson's
demand, not the Presidents, for as
President he had no authority to make
such a demand. Will they attempt to
silence all censure upon the continu-
ing, systematic, organized murders
Of civilians by the armed forces of
Germany? The impertinences of Mr..
Wilson and Mr.. Bryan are as futile as
the cruelties they would condone. But
to what state Of cowardly complaisance
have we fallen when we tolerate such
attempts to abolish free speech.
G.. W. S.