Der Deutsche correspondent. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1841-1918, 1916-04-05
Woodrow Wilson is Responsible For
The Treatment We Are Receiv-
ing From England.

Gread Britain has answered to
our State Departments protest
against the seizure, detention and
censoring of neutral mails. The re-
ply is the same as the answer the
Washington Government has re-
ceiyed to its protests interfering with
our commerce. Great Britain sub
stitutes it's own law for international
law.
Why is it that the protests of the
Government of this great nation have
no effect whatever on Great Britain?
We can look for the reason TO our
own Government. Its policy from
the beginning of the war on to be-
friend Great Britain and her allies
as much as possible, without going
as far as to break off diplomatic re-
lations with the Central Powers, is
the cause of the treatment this coun-
try receives from Great Britain.
A great deal has been written
about the difficult position in which
the President has been compelled TO
stand in his essay to preserve the
neutrality Of the United States. That
this position has been difficult will
not be, and never has been denied.
solved successfully equally difficult
situations. We do not raise our
Presidents to be pro-British.
The demand Of q proper neutrality
required that President Wilson take
certain steps which he has neglected
to take. The result has been that
our neutrality in the present war
has assumed the same malignancy
4. s.l, .1,, 4 10, ~ vi.
tain during the war of the States.
When VIC hailed Great Britain before
the Geneva tribunal we did not adj
nit, in eXtenuation Of her derelic-
tions as q supposedly neutral coun-
try, the plea that it had been diff
ficult" for Her Majesty's Govern
ment to act with impartiality to-
wards both belligerent parties. Our
Pisan neutrality may not bring us
before q Geneva tribunal, but ii is
being tried to-day in the greater.
court of world opinion
President Wilson's position would
have been infinitely less burden
some, if at the beginning of the war
he had acted as follows.
"(1.) A censorship on all tele-
graphic and cable communications
OF Jnc AlllGS.
"(2). An embargo on the export
Of munitions Of war at the outbreak
of the war, as did Holland, Norway,
and other neutrals.
"(3.) Legislation forbidding the
flotation Of war loans.
"C4.) Strict measures to prevent
individual roscryists from leaving
the United States.
"(5.) ConvocatiOn OF q conference
of neutrals, which, as our own Of
ficials privately admit, would re-
solve itself into an anti-British con-
yention, demanding retaliatory meas
urcs against British violations OF
maritime law
A censorship of wireless commu-
nication with Germany was establish
ed. Why were not the British
cables censored? John Bassett
Moore, who has no peer to-day in
the field of international law, has
failed 10 find a distinction between
under-sea and aerial electric waves
which confers under the law Of ma
tions any superior right upon the
former.
The naval power Of Great Britain
placed an embargo on the exporta-
tions OF munitions OF war from this
country to Germany and her allies,
Why did not President Wilson ask
the Congress to place similar en-
barge upon their expectation TO
Great Britain and hers? The less
puissant neutrals Of Europe laid
such cmbargoes.
On the 18th Of August 1914, the
Secretary OF State, by direction OF
the President, issued q pronounce
ment holding chat loans by Ameri-
can bankers to any foreign nation
which is at war are inconsistent with
the true spirit of neutrality. Why
was "thc judgment Of this Govern
ment" so suddenly reversed as soon
as Germany gave evidence that she
could finance herself and had no
need for loans from American BAN
llers? Why was the Administration
50 willing to loan it's support to the
Anglo-French commercial credit OF
last September?
When, in former years, has an
American Administration ever per-
mitted American soil to be made the
recruiting ground for foreign ar
mics? Thousands and tens Of thous-
! ands OF German reserVists are still
held in this country. Why have we
] permitted the Consulates of the AL
lies, and notably those Of Great
Britain, France and Italy, to act as
recruiting stations within the juris-
diction OF the United States? Great
Britain has no ''reservists', yet her
Consulates in this country have
openly and flagrantly in violation OF
our own municipal laws and the law
of nations carried on their recruiting
under the very eyes Of the Admins
tration. Great Britain has even sent
recruiting officers to this country to
enlist not only British subjects but
American citizens under her colors.
What action has the Administration
taken in the premises2
The failure of the President TO
convoke a conference of neutrals at
the beginning of the war was, per-
haps, quite the most fragrant OF all
his failures in asserting a neutrality
which he either did not care to main
tain, or which he was incompetent
OF maintaining Such a conference
-