New-York tribune., 1920-05-05
Stay Out or Go In


The occupation Of Juarez, one of
the gateways of Mexico, by the
Obregon revolutionists increases the
likelihood that Carranza will soon
be a fugitive. Obregon, like the boy
just before Christmas, will doubtless
at the start be as good as he can be,
but nothing will be essentially
changed. Mexico will continue to be
Mexico, and the need of policy will
be as insistent as before.
For seven years the Wilson Ad-
ministration, despite the prolixity of
speeches and documents, has had no
Mexican policy. Many assume there
has been one, but in fact no course
has been charted and consistently
followed. Jumping one way and
then another, the Presidents con-
tradictions have been interminable.
On the theory that Huerta was an
unconstitutional usurper, not only
was recognition denied to him as
head of Mexico's de facto govern
ment, which he was, but aid was
given to Carranza as one pledged to
restore Mexico to constitutionalisnl
Then when Carranza, after he came
to power, openly flouted constitu-
tonalism and became as much a
despot as Huerta had been, his gov
ernment was recognized, first as de
facto and then as de 5atre. There
was one rule for Huerta and another
FOR CarranZa.
d. Equally contradictory has been the
Presidents attitude toward the
question of what possibility, if
any, rested on this country with re-
spect to Mexico. In his Columbus
speech the President said: "The
Mexicans may not know what to do
with their government, but that is
none of our business; and so long as
I have the power to prevent it no.
body shall butt in to alter it for
them" Those words are clear
enough, but repeatedly in act there
has been butting in. Euerta was
! steadily opposed, while Carranza and
Villa have been both opposed and
supported, and the welcome given by
Washington to Obregon suggests the
/. Administration agents have been
= busy again. No one with sense Of
humor will pretend that Mexico's
right under international law to have
the government her dominant ele-
ments desire has been respected.
The alternatives are now what
$ they have been since 1913. These
are either to go In and to put Mex
leo In order by effective intervention
or to stay out, recognizing whatever
Is In Mexico and holding Mexico as q
whole responsible according to the
rules of international law. Both Of
these things can't be done contempo-
raneously. 1t has been tried and
has ignominiously failed-a failure
bad for Mexico and bad for this
country. There must be no longer
single track mind acting as train
dispatcher to set in motion on one
pair Of rails locomotives travelling in
contrary directions.
The part of wisdom, at least for
the immediate future, seems the one
Of letting Mexico alone. If she pre-
fers tyranny we cannot free her .ex-
cept by great and unwelcome labor.
Proclamations won't transform her
passive poems into adult citizenship.
But there is corollary to leaving
. Mexico alone. Mexico, no matter
how ruled, must respect interna-
tional law, cease numbering and rob-
bing our citizens.
To hold Obregon to responsibility
if he attains power may ultimately
lead to intervention. AS to this the
future cannot be read. But If action
becomes necessary after we have
stopped intrusive meddling and mud
ding, our people will at least under
stand the nature Of the controversy
we shall once more be defending a
traditional American doctrine, not
wandering far afield into a pathway
Of war-making simulacrum of
Quixotism such as the President has
now Travelled with poor success on
two continents.