New Britain herald., 1916-01-11
The Presidents Critics. (New York Worldly

There are two kinds of diplomacy the diplomacy that leads to war and the diplomacy that leads to peace.
 Europe is the victim of one kind of diplomacy; the United States is the beneficiary of the other, unless we a; :, to regard war as a national blessing.
 TO American who believe that the United States should have allied it. self with Great Britain, France and Russia in making war upon Germany ana Austro-Hungary, the Presidents diplomacy is necessarily a failure, and the more it succeeds the worse it Ialls. The more completely Ger many and Austro-Hungary yield to the demands of the United States Gov ernment, the more reprehensible the Presidents policy.
 To Americans who want war with the Teutonic allies, anything that pre- vents war, on no matter what terms, must inevitably be iniquitous
 On those grounds, criticism of the Presidents handling of foreign affairs is logical and unanswerable If the circumstances of this European war are such that the United States Gov-
 
 regardless of public opinion, or na- tional interests or the general well fare, then MT. Wilson deserves the most severe censure that can be heaped upon him. But upon no oth- CT grounds can he be censured. If We ought to be in the war as a matter of sentiment, then all his successful efforts to uphold American rights
 
 reproach.
 Nobody will pretend that the Presi- dent has yielded any principle of neu- tral rights. Nobody can say that he has acquiesced in any practice on the part of belligerents which is in defi- ance of law and humanity. What can be charged against him is that he resorted to the slow and patient processes of diplomacy when he had an excuse for plunging the country into war. If we should be at war because European statesmanship was inadequate to the task of keeping the peace, Or because Germany was the aggressor in beginning hostilities, then the Presidents diplomatic suc- cesses are shameful, and it is the solemn duty of Congress to exercise the powers which the Constitution cOnfers upon it.
 Congress can repudiate the reply of AustrO- Hungary in the Ancona case. It can repudiate the pledges of Ger many in the Arabic case. It can ob- literate the negotiations with Ger many for a final settlement of the Lusitania case. It can declare war whenever it chooses and for what ever reasons it chooses. It is the sole arbiter.
 The newspapers and the politicians who continue to find fault with what the President has done and to sheer at the diplomacy of the United States Government are directing their at tacks in the wrong quarter. Unless representative government has mis- teriously ceased to exist, their quar- rel is opposed to war does not change the situation. President Mckinley was opposed to war with Spain, but he had to yield to public opinion and Congressional determination. Presi- dent Wilson would have to yield, too, if public opinion and Congress as- serted their power.
 There can be no honest or sincere criticism of the Presidents policy or of the Presidents diplomacy which does not begin with the premise that diplomatic negotiations between the United States and the Teutonic allies are wrong per Sc and that this coun- try should be at war.