Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1916-03-24
COMMUNICATIONS.
CONGRESSIONAL DISCUSSION,

AOANhlNlNt'''AO+N4h'f
To the Editor of the Registers
Not every one has the leisure to read
the discussions and speeches printed
daily in the Congressional record. In
a monarchy this might not matter much,
but in democracy, like ours, It is all
important that we know what our pub
lie servants are saying and doing, as to
all questions of vital Importance to the
nation.
Just now the advisablity of our Gov
ernments warning all American citizens
10 refrain from travelling on armed
merchant ships while the cyclone OF
war RACES in Europe, has been discussed
Arguments favoring such action may
be summarized as follows;
1t would be a common sense pro-
cedure. A mans rights are limited by
the rights Of his neighbors. A few
foolhardy persons may have a legal,
but no moral right to embark on armed
merchantmen and thus knowingly
ieopardize the peace and happiness Of
one hundred million Of their fellow
citizens Enough neutral ships are now
available upon which our people can
ride to most parts Of the world They
are slower, not as commodeous, but
safe. Those who went down on the
Lusitania could have taken passage
on neutral ship forty eight hours later
They did not, and lost their own lives
and endangered the peace of the nation
Governments ought and do exercise
police powers in the protection of their
citizens. People have a right to ride on
the cars; but there is law forbidding
their doing so, when the cars carry dyna-
mite. have legal right to travel in
the public highway. 1t was made and
set apart for the public to travel on
But during a strike or street riot when
brickbats are flying and clubs and pistols
are used, the policeman warns me to go
home, to forego the exercise OF that
right until peace is restored. TIT is
the duty of the government to safe
guard its citizens on land, why not on
the sea. There is PRECEDENT for such
action, Norway has warned her citizens
not to ride on armed, belligerent ships
President Wilson himself warned our
citizens to flee from war-distracted
Mexico, though such citizens were en-
gagged in peaceful and legal pursuits
under guarantees of protection by
treaty. They had legal right to re-
main there; but to do so, would en-
danger their own lives and the peace
of the nation.
Information law may not be changed
during a war; but to warn our own citi-
zens not to ride on armed YES
sells would be our own business - a
national not an international matter.
No power could criticise our action,
whether favorable or adverse to Its
interests. The national honor would be
maintained; for it is more honorable to
avoid than to invoke war.
Our dilemma, as neutral nation, is
this: England, speaking for herself and
allies, contends she has right to arm
her merchant ships for defensive pur-
poses, and that these merchant ships, sc
armed, shall be treated in all respects,
as unarmed merchant ships, Germany
speaing for herself and her allies, con-
tends that armed merchant ships shoulc
be treated strictly as war ships anc
hence can be fired upon and sunk witt
out visit or warning.
We therefore must keep our people
off such ships, or if we allow them to sc
travel and meet death through German
torpedo, must declare war upon Ger.
MANY. or suffer national humiliation
No nation should ever go to war tc
maintain doubtful, technical law. Oul
own Secretary of State in an officia
paper asserts that the present law for
arming merchant vessels, is of doubt
full legality" Why should not our Gov
eminent even insist upon our people
remaining off these dangerous boats
rather than maintain to the letter a re-
vived, obsolete law, and thereby placing
our peaceful nation upon the perilou'
edge of the caudron of war, the mos
bloody and abhorent one in the annals
of history.
L. w. PEET.