San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-03-27
AN AMAZING MISTAKE

The American public, it not the Brit
ish public as well, are entitled to fuller
explanation than the State Department
at Washington has given of the spur
ious" documents whereby the oil indus
try of this country has been kept out of
The Burma field. If the documents are
or were forgeries, it would seem that
somebody should be brought to account
it not for their creation. then at least
for the assumption that they were gen
uinc.
For their authenticity was unques-
toned. it seems, for at least four years
a period during which international
rivalry in the oil industry became OK
tremely keen. Did the British govern
mcnt authorities know that Americans
thought themselves forbidden to enter
the Burma field? Whether this question
be answered affirmatively or negatively,
or not at all, what was the American
State Department doing in 1919-when
1t accepted the report mentioned in Sec
retary's Hughes recent statemcnt-that
it should be so greatly deceived?
Apparently the search for responsible
ity runs back no farther than 1919. tic
year in which the Bureau of Mines. &C
cording to Mr.. Hughes statement, "cited
the two documents in a report to the sec
rotary of the interior What were our
government officials doing between that
time and 1884, the year in which the
documents were supposititiously signed
hyv tNfn 7 4
1t might be said that the British gov
eminent could not reasonably be blamed
tor the American governments accept
ance OF false reports concerning policies
OF the former, particularly if the WASH
ington authorities made no protest
against unfair treatment But though
this position might be tcnable as a mat
ter of abstract logic, as matter Of inter-
national relations the maintenance of
silence on the part OF the British GOV
eminent, even under the cxtenuating
circumstances which may be assumed to
have existed. would not be creditable to
country that processes to hold Amer
ica's friendship in high esteem. Ii Brit
ish government officials should gain the
false impression that British subjects
were forbidden to own land in Texas.
but should make no protest. would the
United States government remain silent
despite its knowledge of the fact that the
British had been misinformed? If so.
and II the British government deserves
no criticism in the actual case under dis
cusson. then the basis of intcrna.i NAL
relations needs repairing. or outright
alteration. Personal friendship cannot
thrive on disingcnuousncss and there is
no good reason to think that friendship
between peoples is subject to a different
rulc.
The amazing fact. however. IS that
the misapprehension under which the
United States government was laboring
could have come about at all. To say
| that one civilized nation mistook alb
solutely spurious documents for genuine
DEGREES of another civilized nation sounds
like fiction. But the mistake was actu-
ally made-or else present British gov
ernment authorities have blandly lied
and it would seem that the people Of the
United States, if not of England as well
arc entitled to more satisfactory cx
PLANTATION than any that has thus far beer
given.
A politician of the old school has