Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-02-28
Is THIS THE OVERT ACT?

| AMBASSADOR PAGE mas begun an
4 4 investigation to determine whether
or not the unofficial reports about the
sinking of the Laconia and the identity
Of the victims are correct. The one fact
of supreme importance to be verified ia
There seems TO be little doubt that two
American women died in an open life.
boat exposed to the 10y winds of a winter
night. This way of killing women is more
cruel and heartless than If they had been
instantly killed by the actual explosion
of the torpedo which sank the liner. This
appears to be the overt act or "clear-cut
case" for which Mr.. Wilson has waited,
if, indeed these women were Americans.
For he said on February 3:
If American ships and American lives
should in fact be sacrificed by their
naval commanders in needless contra
Vention OF the just and reasonable un-
derstandng of international law and
obvious dictates Of humanity. | shall
take the liberty of coming again before
Congress TO ask that authority be given
me to use any means that may De neces-
sary for the protection of our seamen
and our people in the prosecution of
their peaceful and legitimate errands on
the high seas.
The President did go to Congress again,
on Monday, saying that as yet no overt
act had occurred. But while he was
speaking the new of the Laconia sink.
ing was coming in. While he was asking
for authority to arm ships and use other
methods to protect our ships and our
people Should that become necessary"
it apparently did become necessary if the
facts are as reported. That the Lacona
was British ship is an immaterial de.
tail. for the President opened his address
of February by stating the facts con.
Corning the sinking of the British steam
ship Sussex which had caused him to
threaten to sever diplomatic relations
with Germany. Germany promised not to
sink without warning merchant vessels
of the Allies and neutrals. When that
promise was withdrawn Mr.. Wilson made
good his threat. We did not resort to the
use of arms between February and
February 2G, because ~ no Americans
had perished on merchant ships of the
Allies or neutrals, and G) no American
ship had been sunk under circumstances
more ruthless than were manifest before
the German submarine order of Jan.
uary 81.
If the alleged circumstances Of the
Laconia sinking be not those of an overt
act, warranting armed defense at once, II
will be difficult for many of us to see
what was the point in bringing us to the
brink of war with Germany year ago
over the Sussex sinking.
1t is not that our arms should protect
British ships, of course. that the Presi.
dents appeal is made; 1t is for the British
navy to protect British ships and the
noncombatant passengers Of all nations
thereon. But because the Germans have
killed Americans on BRUSH ShlpS, as
seems certain, the least that we can do
is to protect Americans on our own ships
and not leave to the British navy the
whole task and responsibility of guard.
ing Americans on American ships as we'll
as on British ships.
The peace,atany.price opposition with
sickening partisanship or cowardice,
sought to limit the Presidents right and
power TO use armed defense to certain
kinds Of voyages, even after the reports
of the Laconia sinking gave increased
evidence that it had been only good luck
that had saved American lives at sea.
The Republicans among them need to be
reminded OF what the country does not
forget, that they sought reelection last
summer on the plea that Mr.. Wilson had
not been assertive enough in behalf of
American rights, and that now that he
would assert those rights they seek to
hamper him.