New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-05-21
An Appeal to the Wrong Arbiter.

Nothing could be more pathetic than the
appeal which "The Times" made the other
day to President Wilson to step in and
smash the conference report on the army
reorganization bill. It would be simpler
for the President, our contemporary
thought, TO order the army bill improved
in conference than to wait until Congress
has passed it and then veto it. "He has
gone before the people to urge prepared
ness. He cannot accept this miserable half
loaf" So argued loyal friend of the
President, forgetting that even after
the preparedness campaigning tour was
over Mr.. Wilson wrote to Secretary CARR
son intimating that he was willing to ap-
prove almost any action taken by the lead
ers Of Congress after an appearance Of
consultation with him.
He allowed Mr.. Hay to say Of the House
measure (which was even less acceptable
than the conference report): at is his
(the President's) bill" He didn't raise a
finger to help the Senate conferrees in
their fight for something like real army.
mand that it reject the conference report
and insist on the preparation of new
one giving the country more than the
miserable half loaf" now offered to it?
By accepting the conference report yes
terday the House passed up to the Presi-
dent the responsibility of handing on to
the voters a skimped half-portion Of pre-
paredness instead Of full one.
We felt that "The World" another ar
dent friend Of the Administration, had read
the Presidents mind more accurately than
"The Times" had. 1t was laundering only
a few days ago for the passage of the
Senates army bill, fixing the minimum
peace strength of the army at 100000. The
House wouldn't accept the Senate measure.
The Senate conferrees thereupon surren-
dered almost Internationally to the House.
Thereafter "The World" instead Of call
ing on the President to come to the rescue
of what it calls adequate" preparedness,
treated army legislation as closed in
cident.
Mr.. Wilson lost all power to influence
army legislation because he was on all
of every question raised by reorgan-
ION. He was at first in favor of con-
mental army; later he lost all interest in
the continentals. He was against fed
eralized" national guard afterward he
favored liberalization, with its "pork
barrel" attachments. He said year ago
that there was no need to increase the
peace strength of the regular establish
ment or to increase the army at all. Last
winter he said the regular army ought TO
be increased on a peace footing to l4O,OOO
men. Very recently he has said that a
peace strength of 100000 men would not
be unreasonable" He Endorsed the Hay
bill. but never Endorsed the Chamberlain
bill. He left the way perfectly free for
the Democratic leaders in Congress TO
muddle army legislation.
Mr.. Hay knows exactly what he is after.
Why should he have yielded his very posi-
tive opinions-now successfully translated
into law, so far as the action Of the two
houses is concerned-on pressure from an
Administration which has never had a
mind of its own and which he has never
experienced the slightest difficulty in con-
trolling?
If "The Times" wanted to have the army
bill conference report rejected and new
one drawn to suit the views Of the real
friends of preparedness, the man to ap-
peal to was not President Wilson but Mr..
Hay.