The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-09-15
HOW CAN WE TELL WHAT
THE PRESIDENT MEANS?
John Hancock, Jr.," Returns to Ask
Mr.. Wilson n Pertinent Question.

'JOnn HANCOCK, Jr., heturus " Ash
Mr.. Wilson Pertinent Question.
To THE Hon. WOODROW WILSON
Sir: Inasmuch as you have stepped
down from the Presidential pedestal
for the moment and set out on a
stamping campaign to attack and dis
credit the Senate OF the United
States, may not repeat the question
I asked you through THE SUN during
your last campaign for office? 1t Is
this:
How can we tell when you mean
what you say?
You wrote a book a few years ago
in which you showed how wrong 1t
was for the President to try to sway
or to override the will of Congress
or to ignore its part in our great
scheme of government
How does this square with what you
are doing now?
You absolutely dominated your
Democratic Congress and now demand
that the public compel the present
Senate to surrender to your imperious
will.
You appealed as partisan to the
people to elect only Democrats to
Congress, and you were turned down
by the voters.
You now demand that these same
voters regard as non-partisan your
effort to manufacture a spurious pub
lie clamor wherewith to terrorize the
Senate majority into substituting your
judgment for theirs.
With furious emphasis you declared
at Kansas City that we shall no: be
ruled by a minority and intimated
that the Senators were a small group
animated by partisan motives.
The Senators who do not want ex-
planatory reservations made a part Of
the ratification are far in the minor
ity, and yet you are demanding that
the public force the Senate majority
to surrender to this minority.
How are we to know when you
mean what you say?
You were for peace without victory,
but 1t was explained that you meant
something else.
You were too proud to fight, but 1t
was explained that you meant some
thing else.
declare war TO help prevent militar-
ism triumphing in Europe. but did de-
clare war because our rights were in
proclamation said.
And yet you later told Europe re-
peatedly that we entered the war to
save it from being crushed by mill
tarism.
After a brief trip to the United
States you told Europe that the
American nation was supporting you;
that you were speaking the minds of
the people.
If you were right why are you now
making such a desperate effort to
win their support?
You told the Senators you would
keep in touch with them even though
you were in Paris, and then you pro-
ceeded to ignore them.
All they knew of your commitments
of the American people in the nego-
tiatlons was what they read in the
press.
When they notified you that they
would exercise their constitutional
right and duty to pass upon the treaty
and the covenant solely upon their
merits from the viewpoint of Ameri-
can interests first your reply was a
reference to "pygmy minds"
You were grandiloquent against Sc
cret diplomacy. and at the same time
YOU have secretly withheld treaties
from the United States Senate; you
recently declined to give them a dip
lomatic agreement because it might
embarrass other nations, although it
had been unofficially published IN the
record and in Europe.
Could you possibly have meant what
you said in that case?
You declared that the war and the
treaty were non partisan matters, but
Won left the great Republican leaders
ont of your councils and made the
management OF the war and the treaty
a purely partisan matter.
Now you say you respect the Sem
ate. and at the same time you are
begging the people TO accept your
characterization of the members who
do not agree with you as Contempt
BILE cutters" and by the use of innu-
enlo and iuvcct!ye geek &c bring them
into. public contempt.
It is hard indeed TO know when you
mean what you say.
For instance, you know that the
Senate b"a no intention OF rejecting
the treaty and covenant. The reser-
yations proposed express your under
standing OF the meaning OF the treaty
| as stated at the White House confer
! ences, and yet you are trying TO make
the country believe that the Republi-
can Senators intend to kill the treaty.
And upon this false assumption you
are trying TO stir up popular indig-
nation against those f8ho oppose your
views in the Senate-on the theory