The Wilmington morning star., 1946-10-04
As Pegler Sees 1t
BY WESTBROOK PEGLER
Copyright, 1916 BY King Features Syndicate,
Incl

ism which, to Americans in our normal frame
Of mind, is a monstrosity. Adopted in our
domestic system OF justice, it would subject
to the death penalty any person found guilty
of thinking criminal thoughts. In the peoples
courts of Nazi Germany, primarily for the
purpose of prosecuting Jews, provision was
made that acts not specifically foreseen and
forbidden by law should be regarded as crimes
nevertheless and that the courts might fit the
punishment to these crimes.
In the cases of the Nazi war criminals now
sentenced to death or long Imprisonment. the
United States has gone even further. Not only
are the accused condemned for acts which were
not forbidden by any law when they were
committed and are not forbidden by law even
now, but the court was composed of those
who brought the complaints. The aggrieved
parties made the charges, conducted the prose-
cution. mace the decision and imposed the
sentences.
The satisfaction that will be enjoyed when
the executions are over will vary in lndlv1-
duals but, actually, the value of the killings
as a warning to war-makers OF the future
will be nil. Hitler was not afraid to die and
seems to have expected to die if he failed.
For all his faults, Roosevelt had no fear OF
death and Harry Hopkins apparently met death
a little early rather than live a little longer
under the restrictions of a doctor. Men who
lead nations into war and in war usually be-
lieve in the justice of their causes, as Stain
may have when he attacked Finland without
the slightest prevoeation, as Mr.. Roosevelt,
himself, agreed.
Few Americans have had the composure to
consider seriously the meaning OF this COM
mitment of our government before the world,
in cooperation with a dictatorial government,
Russia's, whose chiefs, by the same stand
ards, should have been put on trial beside
Goering and the rest Of the Nazis. The i'm
mensity and confusion Of events during and
since the war have been too great for popular
understanding.
Even scholars and practical experts in the
special fields of history, law, politics and eco
nomics have been unable to keep up.
But we do know that Americans have al
ways believed that no punishment should be
inflicted FOR any act not forbidden by written
law at the time of its commission. Our Con
s~titution specifically protects us against such
jeopardy and damage, including the
death penalty. Our enjoyment of this security
is subconscious, but it is not hard to imagine
the terror and anarchy that would seize us it,
today, from this minute on, we were to realize
that we should now be subject to the principle
that the United States adopted at Nuremburg.
This departure was never debated among us
or even discussed except in drunken babble in
the expensive saloons which have become the
hangouts of many of our statesmen and bu-
reaucrais. ard their wives, and, even Of one
justice Of our Supreme Court. It never was
seriously presented to the people, a failure
which. may be charged against our press. The
people certainly have not expressed their ap-
proval of the principle, although probably an
overwhelming majority, consulted in the meth
ed OF the poll of opinion. would say they were
glad OF the verdicts. The writer's of opinion
have neglected the subject for reasons that we
may guess. There was so much else to dis
cuss. 1t would have been futile, anyway, be-
cause the government was determined to fol-
low Roosevelt on this rash and flippant COM
mitment, the airy impud snce OF which Elliott
Roosevelt indicated in one of the articles by
which he is recouping his fortune as. a his
torian Of urverified statements and incidents.
Elliott described a dinner scene at which
Winston Churchill held out. against Stain and
Elliott's father, for the British way OF justice,
and came off very badly in that company.
while President Roosevelt scoffed at
his qual:ns. And there probably were some
voices. I'M politics, in print and on the radio.
who flinched from upholding American prin-
ciples of justice, as expressed in the Constltu-
ton and our laws. tor fear that they would
be smeared as defenders Of the horror camps
of Germany.
oeHdLOT hODerC IdIt, OF OnlO, was one OF
the few who dared face the mob, though he
realized, as a pratical politician. that this
was an issue in which a man defending the
most precious legal rights of the American
citizen might be hooted from the platform by
that very citizen, Taft asked how we could
to de-Hitlerize the Germans if. in our
most spectacular act of conversion to the beau
tiful system of democracy" we restored to
the horrible expedient of mprovising law re-
troactively, as Hitler did.
How can the United States approve that
principle in international issues and continue
to maintain the opposite position in our domes-
tic justice?
The confusion and contradictions here defy
reason and intelligence.
Robert Jackson, a justice Of our Supreme
Court, laid down the new law and conducted
the prosecution in a role that placed him on
the side o. the l~ynching mobs and, to the
cheers be it noted, of those organized groups
at home which invade the White House to
threaten the president with race riots unless
the national government takes a hand. against
lynchers. And the same justice. meanwhile,
breaks off to attack his colleague, Justice
Black. for his failure to disqualify himself In
a case in which his former law-partner ap-
peared as counsel. Yet Jackson was appealing
to a court in which the Judges were not mere
ex-partners but actual agents OF the complain
ing party.