The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-09-30

by the very fact, became depend
ent upon the Entente demand.
To allege that j. P. Morgan &
Co. brought the United States
into the World war to save their
investment (Which for the most
part they passed on anyway, Of
course is to take a very romantic
view of such affairs.
All they did was simply to facili-
tate the erection Of the machinery
which made us vital part of the
World War. Our neutrality was
at an end. After that our actual
military participation was large
ly a question of chance.
CURIOUSLY enough, as the
~ economic alliance with the
Entente frightened the more dip
lomatically acute did the con-
troversy become. Berlin's partial
yielding on the submarine issue
exposed the Allies Gust as Bern
storff had intended) to the undi-
vided force of our righteous in
Sistence upon principle.
And the British we're excessive
ly irritating. To our appeals to
international law and justice they
replied by gently pointing to the
fact that we were making more
money out of the war than we
had ever made before.
In August, as the new cotton
crop approached the market, Sir
Edward quietly announced that
they would probably have to make
cotton absolute cOntraband
step which they had bound them
selves not to take.
However, the British also agreed
to buy the surplus themselves. The
1915 crop was actually disposed
of at a good price; the result was
the final confirmation of Ameri-
can business recovery and linked
the last important branch of our
economy to the military success
of the Entente.
House finally warned Spring
Rice that a really stiff note to
Great Britain was in preparation.
DISPATCHED on Oct. 81, it
~ was a long review of the
whole controversy, of all our f1out-
ed principles and unanswered
protests. 1t concluded with the
most ominous language we had
yet adopted toward the Entente
power.
The rules Of evidence upon which
the prize courts determined
enemy destination were without
justification" the blockade order
was ineffective, illegal and indie
fensible";; the judicial procedure
for granting reparation to injured
American shippers was inherent
ly defective" and the jurisdiction
asserted was in violation Of the
law of nations.
The United States could not
submit ito the curtailment Of its
neutral rights by these measures"
But we did submit.
Shall we ever get out of this
labyrinth?" the President asked
House in despair at the beginning
of September G915) only by
adopting a positive policy" Col.
House replied. 1t was obvious. But
what policy?
IN general there were two pos
l. sible courses Of action. They
could confess the failure of the
whole pro-Ally orientation and re-
treat into an effective neutrality
Unhappy, retreat was hard, if not
now impossible.
There remained the more reck-
less, but the always more allur-
ing. possibility of advance. Al
ready a plan was taking shape in
the coIonel's fundamentally as
sisted by careful and far-sighted
promptings from Downing Street.
On Aug. 10 Grey spoke of
some League of Nations" as a
pearl of great price"-it would
compel the settlement of future
disputes between powers by con-
ference" and IN strict accordance
with that international law which
Germany Was at the moment
fiouting so outrageously.
One evening in September, as