Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1918-12-13

nations might as well recognize the
principle, In this case, the small ma
ton didn't recognize the principle, but
it paid the fine. In Roman days the
scheme of expansion was pushed to
the limit. Caesar in his commentaries
explains the system. He would hear
rumors that some Roman merchants
had been seized or murdered. When
one remembers that in those times
the merchant was so little distin-
guished from the thief that in some
languages there was only one word
for the two ideas, 1T does not seem
strange that Caesar heard rumors of
the sort quite often. He would then
plan campaign for the following
spring. Upon emerging from winter
quarters he would march upon the
villages in question. They would per-
haps put up stubborn resistance, but
Caesars tactics and the discipline of
the Roman army would carry the day.
There would sometimes-not always
be a general bhtchery of women
and children, then hostages would be
accepted. and another province would
be added to the Roman empire.
1t should be carefully stated that
Rome treated her provinces well.
Roman justice. though strict, was an
infinite improvement over what the
provinces had known before. The
people were in general more prosper
Gus and contented.
The Romans doubtless pointed with
pride to this contamination, and con-
cluded that the end justified the
means. But somehow we Of today
can not spare the thing with the i'm
mutable principles of private moral
ity." The fact that the provinces paid
tribute to Rome makes 1t appear that
there was really no great philan-
thropy in the matter. 1t looks to us
as though Rome used a pretext to
steal; as though she punished minor
infringement Of her rights by an in
finitely greater infringement of the
rights of others. But let us get 1t
clearly in mind that even if her pur-
poses had been honest even IL the re-
suits of her action had been always
beneficial in the end (Which they
were not) these facts could in no wise
justify her action in assuming control
Is it not yet clear? Suppose a
wealthy woman who is childloss
covets the beautiful child of her poor
neighbor who has seven. She Kid
maps the child and brings him up ac-
cording to her own standards. He is
happier, healthier, better fed, than his
brothers and sisters. He receives a
better education, and let us even sup
pose he becomes finer man. Does
the success of the experiment justify
the original wrong in Selling the
child? Such q wrong would be q
crime in any civilized country. This
is private morality
A few years ago Austria kidnapped
Bosnia and Herzegovina. At that
time Russia was recovering from the
Japanese war and could not effectu-
ally protest. In 1914 Austria, en-
couraged by Germany, started to kid
nap Serbia. Russia did protest and
the world was thrown into war. The
fundamental wrong done was the
same both in Bosnia and in Serbia,
and is no whit altered by the ques-.
ton as to whether she got away with
it. In both cases she wanted to steal.
And the people of Austria and Ger
many backed up their governments,
This is national morality
1t is the claim of America that this
difference between private and na-l
tional morality is not justified; that.
what is wrong for a man is wrong FOR
a nation.
The next article in this series will
show how this fundamental difference
in point of view came about originally,
and will show what relation the mat
ter has to the League of Nations idea.i