Palisadian. [volume] (Cliffside Park, N.J.) 1906-current, 1915-08-21
The Immoral Side
Of The German
Propaganda Issue

Petesham, Mass, Aug. 10, 1915
To the Editor of the New York Times:
The untenable contention of German
propagandists that it was a breach
of neutrality on the part of the United
States to sell war ammunition to the
belligerent nations having failed to
bring results, Professor Kuno
Francke, in letter published in your
issue for Aug. II, pleads for the ces
sation of ammunition shipments to
Europe on the ground Of "lnterna-
tionaI morality" Accustomed as we
are to the pecularities of the German
intellect in matters pertaining to the
war, we were hardly prepared for
this appeal to internationally moral
ity on the part Of German in be-
half of his country, considering that
Germany has shocked the civilized
world by her criminal and repeated
disregard of international morality.
Professor Francke presupposes the
existence in this country Of at least
desire for moral neutrality; he
seems to take it for granted that, as
a matter of course, moral neutrality
is the correct attitude for the nation
in the present worlds struggle. Still
he must know as well as | do that
while the nation is official neutral, it
is not morally neutral. For her to
make such claim would be hypocrisy.
Leaving out those of Teutonic birth
or descent, it is safe to affirm that
the American nation has never been
so united on any question presented
to her. She is not, nor does she de-
sire or pretend to be, morally neutral.
Moral neutrality, so far as the United
States are concerned, was flung to the
wind the day Germany invaded Bel
GUM and the few that succeeded in
holding to the neutral fence after
that demonstration of international
morality" and in spite of German
atrocities and barbarous methods Of
warfare, were rudely unseated by the
Lusitania massacre, and now the neu-
trail fence is deserted.
No, Professor Francke, the ques-
ton before the American people is
not whether "a great peace-preaching
neutral shall build up an enormous
industry in arms and so decide the
issue in Europe" but rather whether
a great nation whose whole structure
rests on love of justice and personal
liberties and on adherence of de-
spotism, tyranny, and brutal force,
shall be contented with helping the
Allies through the exercising of her
legal rights as a neutral to supply
them with ammunition along the usual
channels of trade, or whether she
should not take more active and eff
fective part in defending humanity.
That is the question before the
American people today, and Pro-
fessor Francke's efforts to divert
their attention from it must fail as
all such attempts have failed in the
past.
I agree with Professor Francke
when he writes that these "are ques-
tons which should be decided with
out the bias of racial sympathies or
antipathies, solely upon the ground
of American national welfare" al
though l should prefer to place it on
higher level, namely, on the ground
of the welfare of humanity. But
where, pray, will American national
welfare be should England and France
be crushed and Prussian militarism
triuphant?
In supplying the Allies with am
munition the American nation feels
that she is working for humanity in
helping to bring the war to the only
issue compatible with the sacred
rights of humanity. That some manu-
facturers may derive pecuniary profits
from it is irrelevant and immaterial.
bert Sauveur.