A GREAT DAN GER.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.") Sin,—I have read all your editorials under the heading of "A Great Danger," or something similar, and last night I was reading the last one which has come to me, of a date most three weeks back. I have lived through the period of our Civil War, during which I was a very young man in College and Law School, and I recognize the feeling that fills your heart, and from the bottom of my -soul I am sorry for you. I sent you a pamphlet at the time of the Boer War which would have shown you very plainly that one American at least had an abiding faith in England—if you had only read it, as you probably did not ! I ventured then on the dangerous ground of prophecy, and declared that the English alliance would prove to be a happy thing for those sly and crabbed Boers, and a little later, when your Government concluded the peace arrangements with this people, I almost lost my breath at the concessions you made them. But it proved you were all right there, for "You were right, and I was right, and all were right, as right as could be." Great Britain has had a genius for colonizing ever since her sad lesson in the time of George III.
You were not quite right in the editorial I was reading last night in saying that our Government at Washington is the only mouthpiece of the American people. That is true enough in a technical way ; but it does not make allowance for the very free way that Americans look upon their national affairs. I feel at liberty, for instance, to show my whole heart in this matter, to hate the Germans for what they did to Belgium and France, and to tell the English that they could hardly drive away American sympathy by those terrible guns on the 'Queen Elizabeth.' On that point I think Lord Bryce is more correct than you. He said that the Government at Washington has to conduct itself toward all parties in this terrible controversy in such manner that nobody can say it took one side rather than the other. But our Press feels no such responsibility, and our best papers have been almost as out- spoken as you could wish.
You lay too much stress upon the composite nature of our population. You reckon roughly that there are so many millions of Germans here with a natural love for their Father- land ; so many millions of Scandinavians with a natural fear and hate of Russia ; so many millions of Italians and South Europeans—and here, thank God, the human heart is free and these children of the sun love liberty passionately. And then you reckon up the Americans who have been here a longer time and originated largely from Great Britain, and you seem to argue that if the figures of the two sides are equal, your old friends are paralysed. There, I think, you have made a great mistake. The Germans who came over in 1848 with Karl Schurz, many of whom won distinction in our Civil War, and many others of whom have taken prominent
part otherwise in our national affairs—you cannot count upon
their being opposed to you. The attack upon Belgium, the second war upon France without a cause, the Prussian Junker and all therein implied of hostility to civilization and the humankind, in the name of Prussian militarism—such things as these they hate as if they had themselves been English at the time of Runnymede. You have lost millions of French from Canada, but they have all settled with us in the States, and they can be relied upon to help public opinion still. Do not allow yourselves to believe for a moment that there is any doubt about American public sentiment. Do not forget that America has given these immigrant Germans a lot of blessings that they never had in their former country, blessings that they could not have there now. In the same way as your yielding political rights to the Boers in South Africa frightened me by its seeming recklessness, so you may be sure that a host of these German citizens of ours hay. only a sentimental attachment to Germany, and will not fight for her.
We, especially, of New England, in the heart of which is our beloved Massachusetts, recognize as plainly as you do that you are fighting the world battle for ourselves. Our country is committed to the Monroe Doctrine; although I often have my own doubts about that doctrine, the country as a whole has no doubt upon it at all. Germany has made her
definite beginnings in South America. I, for one, should not care to interfere with her until she began to interfere with the Governments of Brazil and Argentina. The American
people generally, you may be sure, will not submit to ht enlarging the German Empire on our continent. If her people go there as they come to the United States generally, with the definite idea of renouncing their ancient allegiance, well and good. But that is not what Germany means by a place in the sun. She wants political power, and she cares mighty little for her sons who acquire a residence elsewhere and are honoured and happy there, but are no longer subject to her conscription. So I recognize that after Germany has prevailed over England and France and Russia, by some unheard-of caprice of fortune, we are left alone in the worldto meet the brunt of her attack.
I think you will live to see that your idol of this moment, Mr. Roosevelt, is not so great an American as President Wilson. He is out of office, and can talk without sense of responsibility ; but, as Lord Bryce said, if the fighting nations should conclude they had had enough of this war, it is of immense importance that this great neutral country should be so little looked upon as partisan that she can be trusted to do justice between them. Mr. Roosevelt is believed by a great many people to be more responsible than any other one man for starting our discreditable war with Spain. He also made that attack upon Colombia, disgraceful indeed, which prepared the way for our building the Panama Canal. He also opposed and belittled the legislation which drew us back from our false position in the matter of preference to American ships in the use of that Canal. If you saw bow our people flock in crowds to listen to ex-President Taft whenever he speaks in public, and how eagerly they read his words, and consider that Mr.
Roosevelt's party has faded out of sight, you might say that the American people are fickle. But I should say, on the other hand, that, as President Lincoln said, "you cannot fool all the people all the time."
Some one who has returned from Germany lately tells as that the Germans no longer conceal their dislike for America; that next to Great Britain we are most bated of all. And on the other hand, you, who have long been the most intelligent and most optimistic friend of America, are unhappy because we do not more definitely denounce your enemy in this war. You want our Government to speak out the truth about the attack upon Belgium ; and the German Government want us to tell the story of the dam-dam ballets (possibly mythical), and to denounce the threat of famine upon them. The whole world knows how we feel regarding Belgium without our President's saying it, and we are not likely to protest against your keeping food from the German Army. Do we not all refrain from saying things we believe, when we know it will do no good to state them, and will make it impossible for us to have a hearing afterwards for anything we say P
Have faith, good friend. I can remember how men cried in the streets at the time of our Civil War at the sight of the tag. You are having your dreadful turn now, and you are bearing yourselves like men. I am sure you will carry the war through to victory, and that then you will show the same moderation that you have repeatedly shown. Do not distrust your best friends. All will be right at last. —I am, Sir, Sc.,
702 State Mutual Bue7diug, JAMES GREEN. 840 Main. St., Worcester, Massachusetts, March 12th. [Our correspondent's letter is, we believe, typical of the feeling of the better part of America, but we cannot possibly assent to his judgment of Mr. Roosevelt and President Wilson. He makes, we must not forget to note, a very common mistake as to the famous "fooling of the people" saying. It was not Lincoln but Barnum who was its author. —ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
