New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-08-11
MR.. WILSON'S RESPONSIBILITY
with Mexico's Internal Affairs
Puts Blame for Anarchy on His Shoulders.

TO the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: In the days Of my youth one OF my
fayorite legal writer's was Vsttel and mas
tered the work of that elegant writer In it
| learned that every state has right TO
select such government as to It's cltizehs
seems best, and that no foreign state has
night TO dictate TO another state concerning
its internal polty, only so far as that inter
nal polty may affect the treaty rights win
another state; and that whenever state
permitted another state TO interfere with its
internal affairs it ceased to be an indepen-
dent state.
When the United States refused to recog-
MIA Huerta it was strictly within its legal
lights. but when it undertook to say that
"Huerta must 20" and that it would not per-
NIT him to be candidate at the election
which was called at the instance OF TINS
government, and that he would be permitted
TO name his successor until one was elected
IL committed as gross breach of interna-
t,onal law as is to be found in the pages OF
history. When the United States intermed-
died in the affairs of that country and de-
posed its President, or, if you prefer, It's dic-
,ator. il became legally responsible for all
the consequences that followed its interfet-
euce That is statement OF the law that
not LAWYER in the City Of New York dare
challenge.
A tree Is to be judged by its fruits. II the
fruits of our intermeddlng in the internal
affairs of Mexico had brought peace and
order criticism would be silent, but there has
followed disorder upon disorder, until the in
ternal affairs of that republic are anarchy.
We are now told that the anarchy in Mexico
is no concern of ours, nor of any other ma
ton SO long as one obeys the laws and
does not trespass upon the rights OF others
his neighbors have no right TO criticlse his
conduct within his own domain, but when he
sets law at defiance and his conduct infringes
upon the rights Of others, they have right
either individually or collectively to demand
o. him that he mend his ways or measures
will be taken to require him to do so. So
long as the anarchy in Mexico does not lead
to the violation Of international law or oil
treaty rights, no other nation has a right to
complain, but whatever it does they have the
right to demand that she put her house in
order.
We are told that the great powers of
Europe are satisfied with the state of affairs
of Mexico and this Administration manner
of handling them Perhaps so, but ARE
patient with" rather than Satisfied with
would be nearer the truth, and | opine that
they are patient because they are busy. The
craftsmanship Of Europe is eminently
practical craft; it takes thought Of the
impossible, barely considers the possible, and
concerns itself only with the feasible. In
other words, it is not tinctured with grape
Juice.
The first thought of European statesmen is
to secure the widest possible markets for the
commerce of their own lands and to make
secure such markets as they have established, /
and in doing this they permit no sentimental
ity to intervene Such states will not remain I
supine while anarchy destroys their COM
merce and trespasses upon the rights of their /
citizens who are in a land where the govern X
ment cannot or will not protect its foreign \
residents
When the Great War is over the combined
powers of Europe (such is my opinion) will |
make a joint demand upon Mexico that
anarchy in that state cease and that it |
establish a stable government with which /
foreign nations may deal, and failing to do \
SO coercive measures will be adopted to force
In such an event the United /
States must do one of three things:
(a) Mediate in Mexico for the restoration 4
Of stable government;
OBJ Abandon the Monroe Doctrine, or
(c) Fight CHARLES f. CHIDSEY.
Pascagoula, Miss, Aug. 7, 1916.