Prev | Current Page 312 | Next

Various

"The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915 What Americans Say to Europe"

A neutral power must not allow any of the acts referred to
in Articles 2 to 4 to occur on its territory.
This pledge the German Empire had solemnly made only seven years ago. It
would seem that Prof. Burgess may accept the distinction ably made by
Prof. Muensterberg between "pledges of national honor" and mere "routine
agreements," placing Hague treaties in the latter category.
The allegation that France and England secretly did unneutral acts in
Belgium is as yet without proof of any sort, and must be interpreted by
the commonsense consideration that a neutral Belgium was a defensive
bulwark for France and England. To have tampered with her neutrality
would have been motiveless folly. How much more decent and moral than
Prof. Burgess's meticulous weighing of national reincorporation as a
means of evading national obligations is Chancellor Hollweg's robust
plea of national necessity! Prof. Burgess's whole moral and mental
attitude in this case seems to be that of a corporation lawyer getting a
trust out of a hole under the Statute of Limitations or by some
reorganizing dodge.
FRANK JEWETT MATHER, Jr.


Pages:
300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324