Palisadian. [volume] (Cliffside Park, N.J.) 1906-current, 1915-12-25
If The Colonel Had
Been The Kaiser

whole world more out of joint than
he usually does. But what could he
expect, since the one man born to
set it right is out of office? Presi-
dent Wilson is, of course, thoroughly
incompetent. If proof of this were
lacking, it could be found in the fact
that he is heartily supported by Mr..
Taft. And Mr.. Roosevelt can find
no hope even in the fact that the
President is borrowing ideas from
the Colonel-though always about a
year too late. cover a year ago l
pointed out that it was the duty of
the United States to champion the
integrity of the neutral rights of
Belgium, against the lawless conduct
of belligerent Germany"
This statement, which in substance
Mr.. Roosevelt has made repeteadly,
raises an interesting question. Many
have asked what Mr.. Roosevelt would
have done if he had been President
in August, 1914. The answer just
made by his old friend and psyche
logical analyzer, Professor Munster
berg, is that Sin the White House he
would have been the leader of the
anti-Allies." This is an inference
from the fundamental German SYM
pathies which the professor discovers
in the Colonel. And here comes the
really interesting question. 1t is not,
what would Roosevelt have done had
he been President, but what would
he have done if he had been the
violent and iterated condemnation of
the Germany Government for violat-
ing the treaty with Belgium, is he
not condemning himself? Have we
not evidence, in what he did and in
the views which he has expressed,
that if he had been in the Kaiser's
place he would have invaded Bel
GUM without scruple, and, instead
of apologizing for it half-heartedly,
as the German Chancellor did, would
have glorifed it as an act of the
highest international righteousness
The essence of the charge against
Germany is that she broke her
treaty guaranteeing the neutrality
of Belgium and the inviolability of
her territory. Well, the United
States had treaty binding this
country just as strongly, yet Presi-
dent Roosevelt broke it without
moments hesitation. The treaty of
country solemnly recited that "as an
especial compensation for the said
advantages, and for the favors they
have acquired by the fourth, fifth,
and sixth articles of this treaty, the
United States, guarantee, positively
and efficaciously, the perfect neutral
ity Of the aforementioned isthmus
Panama. :. and the United States
also guarantee, in the same manner,
the rights of sovereignty and prop
erty which New Granada (Colombia]
has and possesses over the said ter
ritory" But we all know what hap
pened. When Roosevelt "took" the
isthmus, far from paying any re-
gard to our promise to guarantee Co.
lombian sovereignty over it, he gave
orders to prevent Colombia from even
attempting to assert her own sove-
reignty. And as if to leave no
doubt in any ones mind concerning
his notions of international morality
Mr.. Roosevelt fatty declared later
that if he had not been able to seize
the isthmus by means of a fraud
ulent revolution, he would have re-
sorted to direct force. In a letter to
w. R. Thayer, printed in the latter's
Life of John Hay, Vol. II, p. 238, he
wrote: eff they 1.-THE Panamanians]
had not revolted, 1 should have rec
commended to Congress to take pos
session of the isthmus by force of
arms" The Kaiser would be hard
put to it to beat that.
In the same life of Hay there is an
other letter by Mr.. Roosevelt which
indicates how much weight he would
have given, had he been Kaiser, to
the Prussian treaty of 1889 guaran-
ter was written to John Hay him
self, at the time of the negotiation
of the y-Pauncefote Canal treaty,
in 1900. 1t contains phrase which
might we'll be thought a Roosevelt
variant of Bethmann Hollweg's
"scrap Of paper" Here it is:
+, GAS for existing treaties-I do not
admit the dead hand of the treaty
making power in the past.
Of course, being Mr.. Roosevelt, he
hedged and went on to speak of the
need of having treaties "honorably
abrogated," but who can doubt that
the sentence we have quoted speaks
the instructive attitude of the Colonel
toward a treaty that gets in his way?
By so much, the Harvard psychologist
is right in finding right Prussian
quality in the American whom he has
so intimately studied.
Going back, then, to the question
what the Colonel would have done if
he had been the Kaiser, we are forced
to conclude that he would have struck
at France through Belgium with
even less reluctance than Wilhelm II
displayed. And such talk as he now
INDUCES in about Belgium he would
have scorned as merely so much
chatter. We do take patriotic pride,
however, in the belief that the Colonel
would have far out-done the Kaiser
in one respect. The latter represent
ed the attack on Belgium as dis
agreeable military necessity, and his
heart bled over Louvain. But if Mr..
Poocau.lf bod bod that iOh tO do he