The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-11-02
Continued from Page IL


have disregarded all internationa
law. would have appropriated private
| property in defiance Of express treaty
| obligations, and would have violated
the Constitution of the United States
which confers upon the Congress alone
the war making power
Mr.. Hughes admits that he is in
accord with Mr.. Roosevelt. At Louis
vile, Kentucky, October 18th, he wa.
asked the point blank question, "Wha1
would you have done when the Lusi
tania was sunk?" Mr.. Hughes re.
piled, in substance, that he woulG
have threatened the Kaiser so effec-
lively that 1.-The Lusitania would never
have been sunk
This seemed merely evasive because
Mr.. Hughes was not asked what he
would have done to prevent the sink
Ing of the Lusitania, but what he
would have done after the Lusitania
had been sunk. So I challenged him
to answer that specific question. Mr.
Hughes in speech at Youngstown
Ohio, October 18TH replied to that
challenge as follows:
"The Secretary of the Treasury finds
fault with my answer to the question
put to me the other night at Louis
VIM 0OOoL (IIO oIAhIAS VI tIiC 1Looi
! tania. He says that I did not say
what I would have after the sinking
''You may recall that stated speci-
fically the position I would have taken
| in advance, and the notice I would
! have given of the action I should
] take (viz. that he would have broken
off at once, diplomatic relations with
| Germany "and I added that with this
! position unequivocally stated in ad-
/, vance, and backed by convincing
/ administration record, the ship would
not have been sunk.
Nov rises the Secretary of the
Treasury to complain that this was
not statement of what would have
| been done had, nevertheless, the sink
| Ing occurred. But I was under the
impression that when I said what I
! would have stated in advance as to
what would do every one would
know that I stated what, in fact, I
!. would have done in the described
Ovont."
At last Mr.. Hughes is definite in
spite Of his characteristic indirectness
and circumlocution. He means what
|, he could have said in Is words, viz:
Fl would have broken off diplomatic
,, relations with Germany Immediately
after the sinking Of the Lusitania."
Such rash and reckless action My
Mr.. Hughes would have precipitated
Immediately an unnecessary and
bloody war with Germany.
Mr. Roosevelt and Mr.. Hughes are,
it will be seen. in complete accord.
Each would have brought on war
with Germany immediately after the
sinking Of the Eusitania. They differ,
80 -. 81 OF n,r1x sya oatI Cd
Mr.. Roosevelt would have begun by
an act Of aggression-seizing the
ships of German citizens lying in our
harbors-and Mr.. Hughes would have
begun by Immediately breaking off
diplomatic relations.
!. Neither Mr.. Roosevelt nor Mr..
Hughes would have attempted first
to adjust the difficulty peaceably and
honorably through the channels of
diplomacy as President Wilson did.
Both Mr. Roosevelt and Mr.. Hughes
would have acted hastily, recklessly
and Unexpectedly and rushed the
country into a needless war with
Germany without any attempt what
ever to preserve honorable peace. We
should now be in the midst of that
war with all of it's momentous and
calamitous consequences. The issue
with Germany would be unsettled,
our rights on the seas unacknowlegd-
ed and, our future involved in the en-
tanglements Of the European war and
the intricate mazes of European poll
tics.
Contrast this with President Will
sons courageous and intelligent
course Instead of a mad appeal to
force he appealed to diplomacy and
by the power Of intellect, patience,
1irmness and justice secured from
Germany full recognition Of our rights
and our contentious and the rights Of
humanity without the loss of a single
American or German life, maintaining
honorable peace between the two ma
lions and achieving through diploma
tic channels q victory which could not
have been won as quickly or more
securely by the sword. What more,
If as much, could we have gained by
the senseless and inexcusable war into
which Mr.. Roosevelt and Mr.. Hughes
admit that they would have plunged
the country?
The admissions of Mr.. Hughes and
Mr.. Roosevelt have a deep interest
and significance for the American
people. Mr.. Hughes is seeking the
presidency and is relying upon the
support and influence of Mr.. Roose-
welt for his election. Mr.. Hughes as
president would have charge Of the
foreign relations and policies of the.
United States. Mr.. Roosevelt would
undoubtedly be his chief adviser, Of
ficially, or unofficially, in all foreign
and domestic affairs. It is a matter
of the gravest concern to the .Ameri-
can people that their president shall
not be an Incorporate, injudicious,
rash or impulsive person, who in
grave crises will act hastily and reck-
lessly with all Of it's perilous conse-
quences. Has not Mr.. Hughes SO il
Illuminated his own character by his
answer to the Lusitania question as to
demonstrate beyond question that he
would be an unsafe anad reckless Ex-
ecutive in a great emergency? And
is not he made doub1y dangerous by
the potential influence which the
reckless, vain glorious and violent Mr..
Roosevelt would exert over him?
For the past two years we have
been facing the gravest kind of perils.
We shall continue to face them as
long as the war in Europe lasts. The
situations have been delicate and diff
ficult-beyond the grasp of the mind
of any man who has not been in the
hi CHER councils of the government and
familiar with their every phase and
asrect It is obvious that a whole
people cannot successfully conduct
tiofI 1or