Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1919-02-10
Ill.imcd and Unwarrantcd

7 JOWEVER wcil-ntontoncd it may have
1 been the resolution introduced by Senator
Weeks, of Massachusetts, attacking the Brit
ish trade embargo. and the debate in the
Senate concerning il. arc certain to have an
unfortunate effect. Senator Weeks admittc ed
that the embargo, which shuts ont imports
of certain articles into tho British Isles, is
not aimed any more AT hmcrican-madc goods
than tho products Of any other country, yet
in the debate that was precipitatcd the An
Glopbobcs seized upon :hc opportunity for 4
vicious attack on the British government,
and Republicans like Senator Knox. OF Penn
sylvania, former Secretary Of State, added
fuel TO the flames by stirring up the Old row
over the Panama Canal tolls act.
What is ii that tho British government has
done? It's embargo is nothing more than Il
protective wall set up to safeguard its indus
tries during tho period of reconstruction
We may complain against il and demand
similar steps by our government, Ii We are
so disposed; but cannot deny the right
OF Great Hritain 10 set up such Il barrier any
more than We can deny the right Of our own
Congress to set up protective tariff TO pro-
tcct American industries against imports from
England and other countries. In fact, there
is every reason TO believe tina: Senator
WeokSS own party, after it. resumes control
OF the Congress after March 4 ncxt will un-
dertake to replace the Underwood tariff,
which is now on the statute books. with an
old-faShioned Republican high protective
tarifi.
TO say that the British embargo is in VIC
lation Of tho third article in President Will
sons fourteen terms OF peace. is deliberately
TO ignore the Presidents own Interpretation
OF that article; for he made it very plain
that when he proposed there should be no
economic barriers set up by one nation
against the other, he meant barriers which
would discriminate against one nation or
group of nations in favor of another; in other
words, he was opposed to the after-the-war
trade boycott against Germany proposed by
the Paris conference of 1916.
So much for the rights Of Great Britain
III inc premises. The more serious concern
should attend Ike uurestraned utteranccs OF
the professional Anslophobes in the Senate
who. now that the war is over appear Il,
think it wise. good politics. 10 trade With
the anti-British sentiment among certain
classes in this country. Forgctful OF a. ties
OF blood that We're forged in Tie ire and
the fury OF the fIightful contest aEaiusr yte
common enemy. unmindful Of The fac. thsc,
technically AT least. We are still " VIZ Win
mat enemy. dfsrcgarding the earnest .nd IN.
nortant efforts OF he President 10 weld he
mutual esteem OF the United states auI us
"'iieS INTO 4 compact Tor perpetual peace
'heSe dSmagogucs rush into the Forum eugeY
|" sur up the old prcjudices and replace The
GOOD leeIinSs existing among those nations
VIVA feelings OF luminosity and distrust
Tearing always il mind the fact tha, this
embargo is not aimed ut the United Statns
any more than it is aimed at France. or
i'alH' or Japan, or Degium, or the central
powers can one conceive OF anything more
nncaiied Tor than, for instance, the sonsa
tiona! warning Of Senator Lewis Ct Illinois
TO England to Beware The spirit of 1912 -.
or the assertion OF Senator Reed. of Mis-
souri, that Britain wanted our soidicrs. hut
Goes not want our goods? r. il no, s.,los
manshio 1t is Gcmagogucrv.