O620 1 \^V^ s .V .,,.<«. ^ ./- .V ^^ .s' ^q'w- ^o".,^ '^o^ \> *■ ' Vl^ J, - > -'-cli/-^,* „0 --mc. ^-./ '^^■- '-^o«' r^^. %/ mk- '*-o *^. o. »' ,&^ \b *' .-. s' =^ " "' ^ aO ^^ <- = „ ' ^^ ^q^ - . , 1 • ,0-' ^ ^S^/,^''^ '^y^i:^^/'^ ^MfS^^^".^""^ ^^^^w" o " o , ''r-, ,'•> « ' ' ' V >-^ wrrt" ,. jy-M^j% .^" „». ";•, ••= J' . " o »--^"V^- •^vl'' • c » 3 V ^/ ' ■ ^ %.^ ^^iSfe^ ^^:.^^ ::^^^"l" %/ ,^^-. "°. .0^ -p ,.Q' .^ q. "<=.- '^^i^^<^ 0" .0' <^. ■0^ " I " o -."y ^ '•^. ■> » ■= » *o V <^ *i^ , » ,- ""Z' AV '^- J" s- *\ .>• > .v^.. <^cV 7>j < ^^- C^' >^' <<■ V •> ' o ^. ^ .^ •-' " o ,0 ■ ' ^ V/=-\>v'^ v^P; ,■=1 J-- ^ 0^- ^- ■^. 'v..<,^^ . ^- -^- -■ ,0' c = " ■>- ^-^i^;'-*:^ ..V f w7Z^;'-. ■ ,0' THE GERMAN-AMERICANS and the European War A REPLY TO Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and Others BY GEORGE VON SKAL F.atur'- to V^.7. c.'*Iiibliorfraphy I :o. of CoDgrass '::;it yet, C.ualogrued) 1^^ '-->v^ The German- Americans and the European War. A Reply to Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and Others. By GEORGE VON SKAL. With the exception of the first few years after the creation jf this republic the naturalized citizen has been the object of ;onstant attacks unless he was of English nativity. In the war yi the revolution the Germans and the Irishmen fought almost without exception for the independence of the colonies, while practically all the Tories or opponents of the new common- vealth were of English birth. After the republic had been ;stablished about ten years the Federal party, which was in )ossession of the government, held the foreigners responsible for he attacks made upon it. It passed in 1798 the so-called alien md sedition laws, which practically deprived every inhabitant of he United States born on foreign soil of the protection of the aws. These statutes, which, by the way, were soon repealed, vere the only ones ever passed in the United States with the •pen and ovowed intention to prevent criticism of the Govern- nent by suspending the Constitution and supplanting judges iud juries by executive orders, and it is worthy of more than pass- ng notice that they, as stated explicitly by Prof. Woodrow Wilson ri his "History of the American People,'' were directed against •■renchmen and Englishmen. The loyalty of Germans and Irishmen n the United States had never been questioned up to that time. During the following decades immigration from Europe was so mall that the percentage of naturalized voters was negligible, nd therefore not much attention was paid to them. A change ame, when about the middle of the last century, large numbers if Germans and Irishmen had come to this country and began take an interest in American politics. They and their virtues eceived much and constant praise from all parties who wanted 3 their votes before elections as well as someunies after them, by those for whom they had voted, but by the politicians who could not persuade them to follow them and by those with whom they disagreed, the naturalized citizens have always been at- tacked and frequently abused. They have been called foreign- ers and aliens, unable to understand American institutions and unworthy to live under them. Flattery has been bestowed upon them frequently when the desire to win their votes existed, but full justice has never been accorded to them by the American people as a whole, and not even by American historians. The "History of the American People," by Woodrow Wilson, con- tains hardly a mention of the influence of the Germans upon the development of the United States. The "hazing" of the naturalized citizen, as the President pleased to express himself, is therefore not a new departure caused by their present attitude, but has been in existence from the very day when they first began to form an influential part of the American people. The slightest attempt to criticize conditions in this country or to compare them with those in European countries has im- mediately been followed by the insulting advice that those who do not like it here had better go back to where they came from. Such suggestions were of course accepted with sincere pity for those who in their deeprooted self-sufficiency refused to benefit from the wider experience of others, but the naturalized citizen has always regretted that it seemed impossible to convince those with whom he happened to differ of his honesty and con- scientiousness in the discharge of his civic duties. No American citizen of German birth has been secure against these attacks. In the speech to which I shall refer at length, Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard exalts the late Carl Schurz as a perfect American citizen and a model for all Germans residing in the United States. We concur in this most heartily. But Mr. Villard conveys the impression that Mr. Schurz was immune from the aspersions constantly cast upon German-Ameri- cans. This was by no means the case. His high patriotism, his universally acknowledged probity and the great services he had rendered to his adopted country did not protect him. Every politician, high and low, who differed with him used his alien birth as a means to belittle him and to throw suspicion upon his motives. Senator Conkling called him "more Prussian than the King of Prussia," and insinuated that Mr. Schurz was the paid agent of Prussia in this country. Senator Carpenter of Wis- consin accused him of being unable to fully understand Ameri- can ideals and of remaining a German under the surface. Senator Morton of Indiana held him "guilty of the attempt to array the Germans against men of native birth, making an effort to segre- gate the German vote, and claiming to own the American citizens of German nativity." Later, when Carl Schurz was Secretary of the Interior and took the first steps to protect the forests against vandalism, Senator Blaine charged him with an attempt to foist the abhorrent system of Prussian bureaucracy upon this country. These few instances will suffice as proof that the con- ditions now prevailing are not exceptional, and that every German-American, no matter how unselfishly and loyally he had served the United States, has been subjected to the process of "gentle hazing" approved and recommended by our President. We all know how this feeling was intensified at the out- break of the war, and how everybody who refused to align him- self on the side of the allies was assailed with a fury that at times appeared almost irrational. It has not abated, on the contrary it seems to be stronger and fiercer than ever. The time has arrived when a comprehensi\'e reply to the charges uttered should be made. If I call my attempt to formulate such a reply an answer to Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and others, I do this because Mr, Villard has in the form of a lecture before the Laurel Hill Association of Stockbridge collected all the accusa- tions made against the naturalized citizens, especially the German- Americans, and presented a formidable appearing indictment. Taking this document as the basis for my reply, I am given the opportunity to take the charges up point by point. In addition, Mr. Villard lays stress upon the fact that he was born upon German soil of a German father, and he uses these facts in con- nection with the well-known friendship existing between his father and the late Carl Schurz to create the impression that he is especially fitted to speak on the attitude of the American citizen of German nativity or descent. I deny this claim most emphatically, for while it is true that Mr. Villard's father was a German, and he himself was partly educated in Germany and speaks the German language, it is an undeniable fact that his viewpoint is distinctly English, that his knowledge of German history is deficient, and his insiglit into German conditions and the German spirit is badly warped by prejudice and passion. As to myself, I came to the United States nearly forty years ago, am a citizen since 1884 and have ever tried to be loyal and of service to this republic. I have frequently been at odds with other German-Americans because I opposed actions which in my opinion might produce antagonism between the German element and the rest of the people. Perhaps the fact that many years of my life were devoted to an honest efifort to bring about a better understanding between the American and the German people, gives me a certain right to make this reply. However, I speak for myself, have no mandate from any organization or any large number of my countrymen, and say what follows solely because I believe that somebody should publicly resent the insults showered upon us. If we cannot convince our enemies that they wrong us and are serving their country — whose welfare they have constantly on the tips of their tongues- — badly by sowing hatred and dissension, we can at least show that we are not afraid. Carl Schurz and Oswald G. Villard. Like all the others engaged in this campaign, Mr. Villard attempts to strengthen his claim by quoting sentences from the writings and speeches of Carl Schurz. He uses them more ex- tensively than anybody else has done so far. This is perhaps natural because, as I have said before, his family and that of the late German-American statesman were connected by strong ties of friendship. It is extremely convenient to call a silent witness because we must take his words as they are printed, and we cannot ask him to explain in what connection they were uttered or what he had in mind when he pronounced them. We can never know exactly what feelings a sentence was intended to convey if we consider it standing alone; we must endeavor to fathom the state of mind that produced it. But Mr. Villard not only quotes single sentences which suit his purposes and builds his arguments upon them, but he sometimes makes out his case first, renders judgment and then calls Carl Schurz as a witness. He quotes correctly from a speech of Carl Schurz that the American citizens of German blood have never per- 6 Tiitted their affection for their native land to interfere with their iuties as American citizens and least of all to seduce them into my design or desire to use their power in American politics for oreign ends, and he continues: "How amazed would Carl khurz be to return to us today to find that that has come to )ass which he deemed inconceivable, that German-American iffection for their native land has interfered with the proper ittitude of the great bulk of those towards the land of their idoption and has seduced them into the design and the desire o use their power in American politics for foreign ends." Now ^ submit that this reasoning is wholly mendacious and almost iiabolical. There is no evidence of any kind that the German- \mericans have used or attempted to use their power in domes- ic politics for foreign ends nor is this the cause of the attacks nade against them. The war was not twenty-four hours old vhen almost the entire American press began to abuse not only he German government and the German people, but every jerman in the United States, whether an American citizen or lot, if he did not immediately acknowledge that Germany was n the wrong, had begun the war and should be defeated and )unished. This has been kept up incessantly with undiminished ;nergy. Surely the German-Americans could not have made any ittempt to interfere in the interest of Germany during the first veek of the war when they were called traitors and undesirables ;imply because they conscientiously believed that Germany had )een wantonly attacked and deserved to win the war. And luring all this time I have never heard that any German-Ameri- :an has demanded that the United States should interfere in the ;onflict or do anything to assist Germany. I have been informed hat many illustrious Americans have called upon the President md the nation to join the Allies in their war against Germany, nen like ex-President Roosevelt, President Eliot, Mr. Joseph d. Choate, Mr. Rene Coudert, Mr. George Haven Putnam, Mr. A'illiam D. Guthrie. They have made more or less violent speeches to that effect, and they have abandoned the good old ;ustom, observed by all German organizations in this countrj :ven during this present war, of toasting the President first at ormal occasions, for the habit to toasting him jointly with the SCing of England and the President of the French republic. They lave reiterated time and time again that we owe a debt of grati- 7 tude to France and must repay it now in order to enable her to crush Germany. I could extend this list until we are all tired of listening to .it, but it is unnecessary to do so because we know the facts, and I am sure Mr. Villard knows them too. Even at the risk of becoming tedious, -we must repeat con- tinually and most emphatically that no voice has been raised from among the German-Americans asking interference in the war or a single step with the intention of favoring Germany or Austria- Hungary. All demands of this kind have originated with the enemies of the Central Powers and with American citizens who either were born in, or are connected with, England or France, or who are proud of a long line of American ancestry. Every demand emanating from the German-Americans was prompted as much by their desire to serve their adopted country as by their love for tlie fatherland. We har^'e always believed, we believe now, and we will continue to believe that the United States and Germany have many interests in common, and that nothing should be done in either country which might harm the other or lead to misuderstandings. We know that the United States has nothing to fear from Germany and that all the stories of sinister designs on the part of the German Empire upon America are silly and contemptible falsehoods, and we are thoroughly sorry if they are believed here. We believe, how- ever, and in fact we do know that Great Britain has never been the friend of this Union, and if we oppose all movements and actions which may lead to an increase of British influence on American soil, we are led by a sincere love for the country to which we have sworn allegiance. It is natural that we want to see the land where we were born and where we have left friends and relatives, victorious in the great struggle now going on, but we have asked nothing and done nothing to assist her to accomplish her purposes. Our efforts have been confined to charitable work, and native born Americans have done the same for other nations and have even asissted us in the work we have undertaken. It is true that we have sent large amounts of money and gifts of every description to the fatherland, but they were destined for the wounded and the cripples, the widows and the orphans and the sufferers from the war in general. We liax'e not even gone as far as Americans who organized a movement to supply the soldiers of the allied armies in the trenches with 8 necessities, because we believed this action to be unneutral. We have strictly confined ourselves to actions the motives and purposes of which cannot be questioned. The Right to Criticise the President. It is quite true that we ha\e organized a movement the object of which is to induce our government to observe strict neutrality towards all belligerents. In this connection we have to some extent entered the field of politics and employed the means at the command of every citizen to exert pressure upon officials, whether appointed or elected, -to compel the administra- tion to treat all nations alike. In doing this we exercised a right of the American citizen that has never been questioned, although of course those who are of different opinion do not like it. We believe, and in fact we know, that the President of this Republic has not been strictly fair in the treatment of the different gov- ernments who are engaged in the war. This is actually ac- knowledged by the newspapers who cannot do enough to find fault with us. The "Evening Post," for instance, acknowledged that Germany has been treated more harshly than Great Britain, but excused the President because the offenses committed by the two nations were of different character and had to be treated differently. Whatever may have happened, we cannot under- stand the reason why Great Britain is permitted to cripple our trade with foreign nations, and why that celebrated note which should protest against it was held back until it became so elusive that its very existence was questioned, until it suddenly appeared after more than six months of watchful waiting. The President himself, through his official mouthpieces, has declared that he wanted the differences with Germany out of the way first before acting aginst Great Britain. Now, I respectfully submit that if I have cause for serious complaint against my two neighbors, and am suffering from their actions, I will in all probability proceed against both of them and not tell the one that he may continue to violate my rights and cause me grievous harm until I have settled with the other. This is ex- actly the position the President has taken, and we do not believe that it is the correct one, and are determined to continue to 9 oppose him. It is perfectly true that we have criticised the President and his advisers, and in this connection I may quote Carl Schurz, who said: "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right." That is what we intend to do and what we are working for. We believe honestly and conscientiously that the President and his administration have been wrong in many of the steps they have taken, and we will use our power and influence to set them right. The privi- lege of the American citizen to differ with the administration and with any official who has been elected to high position has never been seriously questioned except in times like these by people who believed themselves superior to the mass of the people and insisted that their opinion must be taken as gospel and followed by everybody else. We have never gone as far in our criticism of the President as good native American citizens who could boast of many generations of ancestors in this coun- try. A few weeks after my arrival in New York a new President was inaugurated, and I remember that a newspaper in this city printed the portrait of the President on the fourth of March with the word "l^raud" printed in large black letters on his forehead. The same newspaper, almost during the whole term of this President, ne\er mentioned him in any other way than by the designation "His Fraudulency," and in later years re- ferred to another President continually as "the Stuffed Prophet." After President Cleveland had sent his message on Venezuela to Congress, the "Evening Post," which is so jealous of the present Chief Executive's inviolability, said: "We are grieved and shocked that anybody holding the high office as President of the United States could play with the mighty issue of peace and war as a political game. We can see nothing else in it." . . . "Mr. Cleveland as a pilot has gone overboard." . . . "Mr. Cleve- land's hysterical message is a fitting sequel to the third term pranks he has been playing." . . . "The President's mad appeal." . . . "The judgment of the God-fearing people leaves him morally impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors." "The World" was still more outspoken, as will be seen from the fol- lowing extracts taken from its columns : "Under the first im- pulse of the shock which the President's astounding message on the Venezuela affair gave "The World" pronounced it a blunder. After a week's study we must characterize it as a 10 crime." . . . "It grows more and more astounding that Presi- dent Cleveland could have misrepresented the situation in so grave an emergency, in so unnecessary a manner and in so shockingly unconscientious a spirit." ... It stated that the re- action against imitation jingoism had set in, and true patriotism was prevailing over buncombe and blunder. It printed letters on its editorial page which spoke of "the criminally insane action, the stupendous folly of the President," and called the latter "the arch jingo and the greatest financial wrecker of the country, guilty of criminal imi)rudence." These ebullitions were accompanied by caricatures ridiculing the President. Of course. President Cleveland had committed the efifrontery of doing some- thing that displeased Great Britain, and that made all the dif- ference in the world. ' Vv^e Are Under No Obligations to England or France. We have not gone nearly as far as the American press has in many cases, especially during elections. We have not, as Mr. Villard claims, stood by the Fatherland through thick and thin, right and wrong, and we return this accusation and say, knowing that we speak the truth, that those Americans who have attacked us have stood and are now standing by the Allies through thick and thin, right or wrong, and entirely regardless of the consequences of their action for the United States of America. Our sympathies are with our Fatherland, and we hope that it will accomplish a splendid victory, in fact we are certain of it, and we rejoice in it because this will mean a bless- ing not only to Germany, but to all mankind and in a great measure also to the United States. We know that Germany has never harmed this country and never intended or attempted to do so. We know also that the only countries who ever violated, or attempted to violate, the Monroe Doctrine were Great Britain and France, who are now pictured to us as the only friends we have. Have we entirely forgotten the war of 1812? "And does nobody remember the fact that long after the Monroe Doctrine had been created and seemingly accepted by all European governments. Great Britain took a part of Ameri- can soil and formed the crown colony of British Honduras? It is true that the American administration of that day did not 11 interfere for reasons of its own, I presume, but the fact remains that Great Britain violated the Monroe Doctrine when it suited her purposes. And must we call attention to the fact that in the hour of direst need, during the Civil War, Germany was on the side of the Union with her sympathies and assistance as far as it could be given, while Great Britain and France did their best to help the Confederacy, wanted to recognize it and waited in thinly concealed pleasure for the day when the Union would be disrupted forever? Did not France, when we were weak and engaged in a struggle for existence, in bold contempt for the Monroe Doctrine, attempt to found an empire in Mexico and give up this plan only after we had finished the fight, and our armies were marching towards the Rio Grande? Are we or have we ever been under any obligataion to Great Britain that compels us to arraign ourselves on her side now and assist her against a nation that has always been our friend? Has not the debt of gratitude that we owe to France been paid off long ago? Even if we leave out of all consider- ation the fact that her main reason for assisting us in the war of independence was her hatred of England and her desire to hamper Great Britain, has she done so much for us that we must now help to repair the crutches on which she is staggering to perdition? And where is the reason for us to come to the assistance of Italy, which went into this war without any cause or excuse, simply because she believed her neighbor was weak and could be compelled to give her a few square miles of terri- tory more than she was ready to turn over to her without a struggle? No, we cannot see a reason why this country should, even in the thoughts of her people, favor one side more than the other, and we certainly will use all means at our command to induce or compel the administration to be really neutral. It is certainly not necessary for me to explain in what way neu- trality has been violated by those in charge of the destiny of this country. I could only tell you things that you all know, and that are known to all those who attack us. Furthermore, they ac- knowledge that they are not neutral, that nobody can be neutral, and that the President himself may be outwardly neutral be- cause his high position forces this duty upon him, but that in his heart he regrets that he cannot be of service to the side in the justice of whose cause be believes. We do not reproach him 18 or anybody for sympathizing with the Allies, but we do insist, and we will continue to insist, that this state of mind must not find expression in official acts by the government of this country, and furthermore, that we be also permitted to have our sym- pathies and to express them in every way we wish as Icng as no harm is done to our country. It will of course be said that as advocates of an embargo of arms and ammuriition we are trying to interfere in the war in favor of Germany. We may as well acknowledge that this is one of the motives, but much stronger is the feeling that the United States should not discriminate against one side in the war, and that as long as the belligerents cannot all benefit by, or use the sources of supplies existing in this country, none of them should be allowed to do so. This, in our opinion, would be a higher neutrality than the one ordinarily observed by neutral nations, and although our sincerity is called in question, we in- sist emphatically that we are not alone prompted by a desire to help Germany, but also by the wish to further the welfare of the United States. The enormous increase in the number and size of plants and factories manufacturing war material, the devotiuu of establishments formerly engaged in peaceful in- dustrial pursuits to the making of arms and ammunition, the shifting of capital from lines of industry which have grown up and prospered in time of peace to others that can pay profits only as long as this war lasts or others are in progress, is, in our opinion, a twofold danger, economic as well as political. The consequences will be seen when the demand for implements of warfare suddenl}'- ceases ; there will not only be enormous losses, but those now reaping large profits will naturally strive to con- tinue a condition that is so advantageous to them. It is hardly necessary to say more than this because every farseeing man or woman will understand us. It is at least a cause for surprise that the same newspapers v.'ho have alwa}'s attacked the manu- facturers of arms and ammunition and have frequently accused them of being in reality promoters of wars and therefore dan- gerous, are now among the most ardent partisans of those who want to continue the business that has grown to such enormous proportions. But as a question of fact we can throw back the accusation that we are prompted by motives which will not stand close 13 scrutiny. It is not true at all that tlie exportation of arms and ammunition cannot be stopped because neutrality prevents it. Such embargoes have been declared before by other nations and by the United States, and at this moment practically all the neutral nations of Europe have declared them in force. The real reason for the opposition to our demands is that we would make it more difficult for the allies to crush Germany if we did not furnish them with the means of continuing the war. You will all remember what an outcry was raised by the newspapers of this country when it became known that the German govern- ment had contracted for ammunition in this country in order to diminish the supply of its enemies. The comments of the newspapers at that time showed clearly that they considered it wrong for Germany to buy war material, while they favored assistance to the allies in every way imaginable. The truth is that if conditions were reversed, and Germany could draw her supplies from this country while the allies were prevented from doing it, an embargo would be declared within twenty-four hours. We protest against the spirit manifested by the attitude of the press and part of the public more than against the action itself. Germany can continue the war and defeat her enemies, even if they draw the last pound of iron or explosives from this country, but by furnishing these materials we become a party to the continuation of a bloody war and assume a certain re- sponsibility for the victims and the losses and sufifering caused by it. Why Germans Have Ceased to Emigrate. In his lecture Mr. Villard said: "What could amaze Carl Schurz more than to find a number of Germans who, like him- self, came to this country to escape the very militarism and autocracy they now uphold. . . . etc." This sentence shows clearly that he is utterly ignorant of conditions prevailing in Germany. To talk of a military autocracy is absurd, but I shall refer to this later on ; for the present I wish to point out that he is in error if he supposes that the Germans now in this country left Germany to escape an autocracy or military service. This was indeed the case fifty or sixty years ago, but times have changed since then. Practically all the Germans in this 14 country who were physically fit have served their time in the army, are proud of it and would not want to lose the memory of the years they passed as soldiers of the Empire. They are grateful for the training and the education they received, and they know that through their military service they have been better fitted to make their way through the world and to accom- plish success in peaceable pursuits. Whenever we who knov^r meet a man who has left Germany and speaks disparagingly of the army and of military service, we try to avoid him, for we know that he does not deserve confidence, and probably left his home in a hurry to save himself from a fate that was riclily deserved. The very fact that there is practically no emigration from Germany siiows that the people are not discontented, and that the talk about dissatisfaction with existing conditions is utterly absurd. The average annual emigration from Germany during tlie last twenty years has not exceeded twenty thousand persons per annum, or about three out of every ten thousand, and it is much smaller than the emigration from the United States both in number and in proportion to the total population. From 1901 to 1913 emigration from the United States averaged annually 575,737 persons, or roughly figuring 70 out of every ten thousand. It was more than twenty times as large as the emigration from Germany, not taking into account the large number of well-to-do people who practically expatriate them- selves by living abroad almost constantly. This condition is, by the way, peculiar to the United States, and deserves the close attention of those who maintain that in no other country can the same state of happiness be approached. The time when emigration was caused largely by religious and political perse- cution is gone long ago, and today it is regulated by economic conditions largely. Only one country exists in Europe where a considerable part of the population is so cruelly treated that it emigrates in large numbers whenever the opportunity oflfers, and that is Russia, the dear friend and ally of Great Britain and France, with whom she fights for liberty and tlie independence of small nations. While we German-Americans revere the memory of Carl Schurz, this does not mean that we do not differ with him on some points. I was fortunate enough to enjoy his confidence to some extent during the last years of his life, and I remember distinctly that in the last presidential 15 election in which he took an interest he had occasion to write a speech to be delivered before a meeting of German-Americans. In this he expressed the opinion that the German-Americans should be especially enthusiastic in the fight against imperialism because they had left their fatherland to escape military service and the necessity of fighting in a war. I pointed out to him that he was mistaken, that times had changed, and his audience might not take kindly to that expression. He was not ofifended by my remarks, because he was always tolerant of the opinion of others, but lie insisted that his point of view was correct. When the speech was delivered, the audience kept quiet, did not applaud, and from the faces of the listeners it could be clearly seen that they were rather astonished at hearing such a statement with which they could not agree. Later on Carl Schurz graciously acknowledged that he had been mistaken, and remarked that of course he was getting old and probably once in a while not in full accord with the changing times. I remonstrated against this, but it is undoubtedly true that he, like every man of ripe age, lived at least to some extent, in the past, and that the impressions which the years of h's early struggles had made still had a strong hold on him. But such was the beauty of his character that he discussed the question with me quite frankly, and though he deplored the change that had come over the German people, he did not find fault with them, but acknowledged readily that there must be some reason for this new condition. He always respected the views of others and never looked down upon them because they held opinions contrary to his own ; but rather tried to find out the reasons and causes for the difference, as long as he was convinced that the motives of the adversary were honest and creditable. We are accused of not imitating Carl Schurz because we do not acknowledge the great debt we owe to the United States. In this respect also, times and conditions have changed. Carl Schurz and those who came with him were fugitives ; they had been persecuted for expressing their opinions and from putting them into action. They had no Fatherland, and they left Ger- many in a condition of discord and weakness, a house divided against itself, a Fatherland that had not treated them as even unruly children should be treated. The Germans who are here now have left, as I stated before, for economic reasons mostly, 16 and they brought only pleasant memories when they came to America. If they have prospered here they are not quite certain whether they would not have prospered as much at home, and whether they would have made the change if they had foreseen that the German Empire would develop so greatly on peaceful lines as it has done during the last three or four decades. They never felt the anger and contempt that the old 48ers could never fully overcome, and they know full well that what they have accomplished is the fruit of hard work, of knowledge and of honest effort, and that they have given full value for everything they have received. If they do owe a debt of gratitude to this country, there is such a debt due to them also for what they have done, although this is never acknowledged by the kind of Americans to which Mr. Villard belongs. The Truth About the Military Autocracy and Kaiserism. Mr. Villard shows his complete ignorance of German con- ditions when he talks of the rule of an iron military autocracy coupled with the aristocratic domination of great land owners, who are in turn the chief supporters of Kaiserism. You can hardly expect anything else from a man who still adheres tn the childish version of an important act in history, namely that Bismarck caused the Franco-Prussian war by forging a disnatch. A military autocracy indeed ! Do these gentlemen really not know-, and do they not want to learn, that the German army is an army of the whole people in the fullest sense of the word, and that all Germany knows not only that it owes to its army the forty-four years of peace which it has enjoyed, but to a large extent its success in every field of endeavor? Every little while we find in the American press the statement that the nobility rules the army, and that no sons of noble families are found in other professions. A glance at the army list would show these people who do not seem to want to learn the truth that at least three-fifths of the active officers of the German army are not of noble birth. In the reserve the percentage is much larger. The army list of 1914 shows that of the Major Generals about one-half were noble and one-half were not, and this relatively large proportion of nobles in the higher ranks is explained by the fact that many officers are ennobled when they rise to high 17 rank, and that these generals entered the army about forty years ago when the nobility was still to some extent preferred. An additional reason is that many of them came from old soldiers' families whose members have served in the army for six and seven and more generations. Thvts they were as children already under the influence of tradition, precept and example, which advantages naturally told in their career. The truth is that the German army is the most democratic military establishment in the world, and the difference between ofificers and men and between the different units is not as large as I have frequently observed it in the New York National Guard. The talk of the aristocratic domination of great land owners is nothing but an echo of the chatter of so-called German Liberals who were bitterly disappointed because the people did not permit them to rule the country. The so-called Liberal Party was indeed the most tyrannical, intolerant and domineer- ing party that has ever appeared in politics. They never ap- proved any measure that had not originated with them, and not many years before the last one of them disappeared it was a common saying that their platform was : "We do not know the reasons of the government for advocating this step, but we disapprove of them." The great land-owners dominate the government, arid the agrarians decide the fiscal policy of the German Empire ! Does Mr. Villard really not know that in Germany a much smaller percentage of the land is in the hands of rich families than in England or Russia? The agrarian party is by no means composed of aristocrats and large landed pro- prietors, but it derives its main strength from the peasants, and if this party has succeeded in protecting the fruits of the soil to a moderate degree against the competition from other con- tinents, it has done no more than American manufacturers who insist upon protection for their products. The burden thus im- posed upon the German people cannot have been very heavy, for we all know that the cost of living is much lower there than in this country, although the Empire is by no means as fertile as the United States. In Germany the former opponents of duties on foodstuffs, live cattle, etc., acknowledge today that this measure was one of the wisest that could be introduced. It has actually saved the life of the nation, for it brought about such an intensive cultivation of the soil that Germany today^ 18 cut off from its sources of supply, is able not only to feed her own population but to export this year certain products, to neighboring countries. If the Germans are satisfied with this system of taxation, we can see no reason why Americans should find fault with them, for Americans certainly have always fought for the principle that a people has the right to decide how it should be taxed, and this is exactly what the Germans have done. As long as a majority of them agreed to the present duties upon agricultural products they, in our opinion, have a right to such action even though a number of Americans are opposed to it. There arises the question whether the German people enjoy all the liberty to which they are entitled. The term lilierty means a great many things; in one country something entirely different from what it is understood to be in another country. Now, it seems only right to let every nation decide for itself what kind of liberty it wants, and under what form of govern- ment it feels happy. That the German people feel reasonably content with the government and the conditions under which they live seems, as I have said, proven by the fact that they stay at home and emigrate in such small numbers. Again, on this point, I cannot completely agree with the views held by Carl Schurz. He was of the opinion that every nation and every race of people was ripe for liberty, and that a certain measure of education or knowledge was not required to enjoy, and live happily under it. He held that liberty itself would elevate a people to a higher standard and could therefore be granted at any time and under any conditions. I and many others hold that there must be a certain preparation, and that it is dangerous to give more liberty to a people than they can understand and intelligently make use of. It has been left to Mr. Villard to announce an entirely new principle as far as my knowledge goes. He says : "There is something nobler and better than efficiency, something far more worth while than good gov- ernment, and that is self-government." I have always be- lieved, and I think now, that what we all strive and work for, for which we have brought many sacrifices and are fighting at every election, is good government. I, for my part, confess that the outward form of government has ap- peared to me always as a secondary consideration. I know 19 from my study of history that there have been republics which were much more tyrannical and despotic than monarchies. U\h- erty, security and happiness have been found under emperors and kings and have been lacking in states that claimed to have the freest institutions ever invented by mankind. Bad govern- ment is bad whether it is self-government or administered by others; good government is always good and worthy of being striven for. The claim that self-government is the highest form of government is certainly not open to debate, but we pay too little heed to the fact that a people can only govern itself, if every single citizen has learned to apply the rules of self-govern- ment to his own conduct. To be fit to take part in the self-govern- ment of a nation the individual must have shown that he has conquered his individual selfishness and can govern his own nature. I do not wish to go into this question any farther be- cause it is too large to be discussed here, but I am convinced that I will be with the large majority, and the majority should always rule, as Mr. Villard says, if I repeat that what we desire is, after all, good government. Any kind of government that does not give good government is really bad and should not be toler- ated, whether it be in the hands of the people, of elected officials, or monarchs. What we are after are results, and all high sound- ing phrases will not help or console us if we are suffering from institutions which cannot make the people happy and contented. There is another point to be mentioned. Have the Americans the right to assist the enemies of Germany to make war upon her and crush her simply because they do not like the form of government she has adopted? I think not. Whatever our opinion may be, the German people certainly have the right to choose their own form of government and resent all interfer- ence from outside. Mr. Villard's heart bleeds for four million social-democrats in Germany who are opposed to the monarchy and militarism, but I have not noticed that he ever had any tender feelings for the social-democrats .in this country, or in fact for anybody who differed with him on political questions. The German social-democrats can take care of themselves, they are now fighting and bleeding for their country. Of the many happy issues this war has produced, one of the greatest and most important is that the German people in general have at last recognized, and acknowledged now, that the social-demo- ao crats who had bitterly opposed many institutions of the country, are good Germans and as ready to defend Germany as all others. Ignorant of Conditions Prevailing in Germany. It is impossible to enumerate, and dwell upon, all the mis- takes contained in Mr. Villard's lecture. It must suffice to say that he is utterly ignorant of everything that has happened in Germany in the last forty years. When he pictures "thousands upon thousands of Germans coming to us bowed and oppressed, with hands outstretched and hearts aflame with hope," we do not know whether to pity him or to smile at his ignorance. He implores us to permit the followers of Bebel to tell their tale. They are telling it upon the battlefields in France and Russia and Belgium. "Let the disfranchised Prussians speak!" Where are they? Where has he found them? It is true that the sys- tem under which the Prussian diet is elected is antiquated and unjust, but remnants of former times remain and cannot be removed as quickly as we all wish, and it requires no great fore- sight to prophesy that this system will be changed as soun as this war is over. Where, we may add, has Mr. Villan-d seen the German-American "who upon bended knees give thanks that they are free to toil by day and by night so that their children may have the priceless opportunities to learn, to move about, to rise in the social scale, to vote, which were not their parents'?" Germans in Germany denied the right to learn, when the Ger- man Empire today has an insignificant percentage of inhab- itants who cannot read or write, less than any other civilized country, the United States of America not excepted ! Oppor- tunity to rise in the social scale ! Has Mr. Villard ever heard of Albert Ballin, Karl Helfferich, Emil Rathenau, August Thyssen, Ludwig Lowe, Heinrich Ehrhardt? These men rose not only from obscurity and humble beginnings to fortune and important stations in the lines of their endeavor, but they wielded a tre- mendous influence in the affairs of State and in the government of the Empire. It is almost pitiful to be compelled to listen to such gross ignorance, unjust prejudice, and to the evident pleasure of abusing a race to which this man owes gratitude and of which he should be proud. Mr. Villard devotes a large part of his speech to a book SI written by Prof. Julius Goebel. I hold no brief for Prof. Goebel, and I am quite positive that he is fully able to take care of him- self, though I must say that it seems not quite fair to hold the German-Americans as a body responsible for the utterances of one man. Mr. Villard finds fault with him for many reasons, and one of them is that Prof. Goebel demanded that the German language should be taught in all American schools. I think, and I am sure you will agree with me, that it would be .indeed a great boon for the American people and this country if in- struction in foreign languages in the puljlic schools could be extended. There can be only one opinion as to the value of such instruction. No man or woman can claim to be in pos- session of an education sufficient to give a right to judge others unless he or she is conversant with at least one language in addition to the mother tongue. The advantages are clear, and I have always believed that the reason why Americans have such a defective command of their own language is to be found in their ignorance of foreign languages. I do not believe that there is any other country in the world where it is so rare to find men or women who speak and write their language cor- rectly. The funny part, however, is that almost with the same breath in which Mr. Villard attacks the Germans for asking to have their mother tongue taught in the public schools, and the Norwegians, Bohemians, Poles and other nationalities for found- ing schools in free America for teaching their languages, he assails Germany for forbidding the Poles and Danes and French within the territory of the Empire to learn and use their own mother tongues. Similar statements are constantly made in American newspapers, and only the other day I found an edi- torial in which the Alsatians were commiserated with because the brutal Germans would not permit them to speak French. We also have heard a good deal of the joy of the peasants in Alsatia when the French occupied their villages and permitted them to study their beloved langauge again. The truth is that French is taug^ht in all German schools, and that in Alsace- Lorraine the inhabitants are permitted to speak French and have French newspapers. They as well as the Danes and Poles are indeed compelled to learn the German language, but that is as far as the government goes. It will, of course, not permit them to engage in political activities with the object of severing the S2 districts in which they live, from the German Empire. This may look extremely tyrannical, but I doubt whether the United States of America would look on quietly if the Mexicans in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California should start an agitation with the intention of uniting the counties in which they happen to dwell with Mexico. Not long ago a writer in an American magazine advocated a law compelling all immigrants to learn the English language immediately, and forbidding them to speak their own language ; those that did not master the English language within a certain time should be deported. The propo- sition was greeted with delight and approval by several New York newspapers. Perhaps they did not know that this law would go much farther than any law existing in Germany, where the children are compelled to go to school and learn German, but where nobody would dream of compelling a foreigner to discontinue the use of his mother tongue. It really seems as if the number of Americans who glory in their ignorance and look with contempt upon everybody who happens to speak more than one language is still much larger than we had supposed. To Mr. Villard's eye the danger looms large that these United .States will be divided into different territories where the im- migrants from various countries and their descendants con- gregate, retaining their own customs, their language and their views and making the part they inhabit completely like the country they come from. He asks: "Shall we begin first by crushing this new German propaganda which says in essence that the German-Americans are merely a transplanted bit of Germany, or what else shall we do?" The Silly Bugaboo of the German Propaganda. Let us assure him and those who are of his way of thinking that he need not fear the future, that the adopted citizens who have settled here and are going to stay here will work as loyally and as eagerly for this country as they have done in the past ; that the United States has nothing to fear from them, but can count upon them to join the ranks of the defenders if the Union should ever again be in danger. Let us impress upon Mr. Villard and those others who talk as he talks, that no German propaganda exist?, that it is present only in the imagination of 23 those who always look with ill-concealed contempt upon others whom they consider inferior to themselves; that it is a danger cunningly and skilfully devised by those who have for many years schemed to involve this country into misunderstandings with Germany in order to reap the benefit of their machinations. We may as well concede that here or there a German-American may have exceeded, and overstepped, the bounds, and said or done things that it would have been better to avoid, but the great mass of them has done no more than exercised their rights and fulfilled their duties. The cause of the whole disturbance, which we must deeply deplore, because dissensions of this kind cannot but be hurtful to the country at large, is the abuse showered upon Germany, the German people and the German- Americans, by almost the entire press and a large part of the American people, from the moment the war broke out. We cannot review the situation in detail now, but we know that Germany did not want this war, and was wantonly attacked when the three powers that had schemed for her destruction believed themselves strong enough to crush her. The efforts of those who devised the ruin of a whole people have been cnly too successful in this country. Every line coming from Great Britain and France has been believed. Proofs submitted from the other side, whose examination would have established the falsity of most of the accusations, have not even been considered. Numerous witnesses— American among them— have testified to the fact that the stories of atrocities committed by the Germans in Belgium were mere fabrications and inventions. The Ameri- can press will not accept any testimony to that effect. They hide behind the fact that Viscount Bryce has signed a report that established those atrocities beyond a doubt. We know that Viscount Brj'ce has not been in Belgium, and that the testimony under which he set his name was taken many miles away from the locations of the alleged crimes and given by persons who were suffering from black and unreasoning hatred and ready to go to any length to blacken the character of the Germans, their enemies. Let me mention only that Viscount Bryce states that Bishop Conraetz, in Louvain, was killed by the Germans. It has since been shown that Bishop Conraetz is alive and well. This is only one instance, while many could be given. The con- clusion is justified that Viscount Bryce signed the document 2i without verifying the contents, in order to do his country a service. Greater and better men than Lord Bryce have, in critical times, done as much and more for their countries. It was of the greatest importance for England that these accusa- tions should be believed in the United States, for they have, no douljt, had an enormous influence upon public opinion. Let me give only one instance of the fairness of Mr. Villard's "Evening Post," which boasts that it is not partisan and does not favor either side. When it became known that the German g(i\ ern- ment had bought ammunition in this country, the "Evening Post" expressed deep regret that the German Military Attache had been engaged in business of this kind. The editor said that activities of such a nature were highly improper, and that he by no means singled out the German Military Attache, but would attack those of other powers as severely if they were found doing similar things. Me forgot entirely that his own paper had not once but at least half a dozen times, reported that the attaches of the other belligerent powers had bought arms and ammunitions in large quantities. Since then it has become public knowledge that these military attaches are acting as pur- chasing agents for their governments and are contracting for supplies of every kind to tlie value of many billions of dollars, but not a whisper of displeasure has come from the "Evening Post" or any other of the newspapers who were so quick to empty the vessels of their wrath upon the head of the German Attache for spending a few millions in this country. We ask nothing but justice. We a^k that the suppression of the truth, the perversion of the news t'lat is furnished fi'om Europe be stopped. \\'e ask that all nations be treated alike, Germany as well as France, Great I'.ritain or Russia. We ask that we be permitted to express our sympathies for Germany, our belief in the justice of her cause and our hope and con- fidence in her ultimate victory as freely as the French or the allies express themselves. i\Ir. Villard has quoted Carl Schurz so extensively that I may be permitted to say one more word on this subject. I, who knew him, and I lielieve every German- American, is convinced that if Carl Schurz were alive today he would stand at the head of this large part of the American people that cries for justice and truth and right, and that he would lead us, as he did so often, in our battles against [irejudice and 25 calumny. He was a German and knew Germany and the Ger- mans. In whatever way he may have differed with political developments in Germany, we are sure that he would not for one moment have believed the stories of cruelty and savagery attributed to German soldiers. He was ready to draw the sword when the cause which he considered sacred was in danger; he would have understood that Germany had to draw the sword and fight for her existence, and he would have known that a German is unable to commit the deeds with which the army has been charged. Those who were nearest and dearest to him ought to know where he would have stood, and they surely want to live in the knowledge that they are following in his footsteps and acting as he would want them to act. Where do they stand? They are with us and for us, as Carl Schurz would have been were he alive today. Where the German-Americans Stand. Let me recapitulate our views in a few words : From our knowledge of the history of Europe — and it is very unfortunate for us and for this country that so very few Americans know anything of European history — we know these facts as abso- lutely beyond dispute: Germany has not been the aggressor in this war; she wanted a continuance of the peace she had pre- served in the face of great and repeated provocation for forty- three years, under which she succeeded in securing for her people unprecedented progress, prosperity and contentment. Her army and navy was kept at a high degree of efficiency, because she was determined to protect herself against the recurrence of the time when Germany was the battle ground of all the nations of Europe. England began to scheme against the German Em- pire when her trade suffered from the competition of this new, strong and capable rival. England wanted to crush Germany, and found ready helpers in France and Russia. The assertion that France had no other motive than the justifiable desire of regaining the provinces which had been taken from her in 1871, is absurd. France robbed Germany of Alsace-Lorraine more than two centuries ago, and with the exception of a few districts, the population of these provinces remained German, and is Cerman now. The story of the "lost provinces" is a mere pre- ss text, for we know that France has attacked Germany at least a dozen times while she was in possession of Alsace-Lorraine. She wants all the territory west of the lower Rhine which has never been French, and never will be. In the last analysis the reason why France went to war is that she cannot look at a united, strong and prosperous Germany without being driven into impotent rage by her overpowering vanity and jealousy. Russia wanted to be the master of Europe, after she had been beaten in Asia, take possession of the Balkans and destroy Austria-Hungary. These three partners in the greatest crime committed against a peace-loving, splendidly educated and progressive people and in the last analysis against all mankind entered into their conspiracy years ago. They helped each other and pre- pared themselves, and struck when they thought they were strong enough to defeat Germany. The claim that Germany could have prevented the war l)y compelling Austria-Hungary to moderate her demands upon Servia is ridiculous. That was exactly what the Allies wanted. Austria-Hungary was the only ally left to the German Empire, for that Italy could not be relied upon was known to those in authority for several years. Austria- Hungary had been offered splendid inducements to join the Entente, and had refused. The German government had no right to interfere in the Servian matter. Had it dune so, and attempted to dictate to Austria-Hungary what course to take, the goverment at Vienna would have been compelled to conclude that its last and only friend had turned against it, and that it could only save itself by submitting to the demands of the Entente powers, and joining them. This would have meant the complete isolation and consequent defeat of the German Empire. This was the situation that England, l-'rance and Russia were trying to create, but the trick was too transparent not to be seen through by those most concerned, and today only a few American editors are repeating the long exploded argu- ments used by the .Allies, in the hope of deceiving the unthinking into the mistaken belief that Germany was the aggressor and not, as is really the case, most grievously sinned against. We have listened to the words of those who have pro- claimed what they hope to accomplish through this war. Eng- land wants to crush Germany, send the Gurkhas to Berlin, de- ar stroy the German navy and mercantile fleet, take possession of the German colonies and utterly annihilate German trade and commerce. France has declared that she will take western Ger- many at least as far as the Rhine, compel the German Empire to dissolve and reduce it to a condition where it has no voice in the policies of the world. Russia intended to take Eastern Prussia, Prussian Poland, Galizia and other parts of Hungary, as well as Constantinople. Belgium had long forfeited her neutrality by arrangements with France and Great Britain which made her the willing tool of the Entente and were directed against the safety of the German Empire. What price she was to receive is not known now but will probably come to the sur- face some day. Italy — but what is the use of talking of Italy, that will never live down the disgrace she has brought upon herself. On the other hand, Germany has from the beginning stated clearly, and repeats now, that she wants protection against attacks, the right to go her own way, the freedom of the seas, and nothing more. On which side are the motives that we can applaud as pure and righteous, that we should be in accord with, and that would earn our sympathies if the eyes of the most vociferous part of our people were not blinded by unreasoning admiration for and slavish deference to everything that is British and detrimental to free America? The answer is plain. And if you want to get a glimpse of the spirit that lives in the peoples now engaged in deadly combat, read the reports from the front of such Germans as Luilwig Gangliofer and Karl Rosner, and compare them with the writings of men like Rud- yard Kipling and Arnold Bennett. On the one side, not a harsh word against the enemies, full appreciation of the sufferings and the heroism of both armies, documents full of poesy and human feeling, and on the other sinister hatred, brutal and almost bestial lust of murder and vengeance, and coarse recriminations that tell of a pitiable reversion to primitive ages. It is enough. We German-Americans know our duty. We have chosen and will abide by our decision. We are not afraid of the continuance of the "hazing" mentioned by President Wilson, we do not fear the ostracism the newspapers threaten us with. We feel confident that if tlie time should come when a division is ordered and, as the President says, the men who are thinking first of other countries shall stand on one side, and all 28. those that are for America first, last and all the time, on the other side, we will not be among those who are denied the place of honor. At the same occasion President Wilson said: "The American Revolution was the birth of a nation, it was the creation of a great free Republic based upon traditions of per- sonal liberty which heretofore had been confined to a single little island, but which it was purposed should spread to all mankind." Now, sorry as we are when we are forced to dis- agree with the Chief Executive of the Nation, we must tell him most emphatically that he is wrong. This country is not a New-England in a political sense, not a New-Great Britain. The men who fought and died in the war of independence and in the war of 1812 wanted this country to be free, not in name and for a time only, but free and independent of England and Eng- lish influence for all time. This spirit has descended upon us and we prize it as a noble and splendid inheritance. If it has been cast aside by others, we are resolved that it shall prevail as long as we have the strength to fight and die for it. We do not harbor the faintest trace of enmity against the United States of America, American institutions or the American people as a whole, though we feel bitter against those who have wantonly attacked and abused us. Although our love for the Fatherland can never die, we remain loyal citizens of this great Republic that has become our own country, ready to defend it against all enemies, eager to do our part in securing for it all the blessings the most enthusiastic mind can imagine, and we deplore deeply the dissensions caused by the unreasoning attitude of a con- siderable part of the population, so detrimental to that harmony which is essential to progress and contentment. But we serve fair notice upon all who may think that they can frighten or cajole us into submission, that our minds are made up, that no matter what happens to us, we shall continue this fight for truth, for justice, for right and for the independence of the United States of America until we have conquered or are no more. As German-Americans have been loyal to this Republic ever since it was created, so will we remain devoted to the country we have sworn allegiance to, to our ideals and to our just cause, even unto death. 39 ,v "^ : ^^ :^^ %/ /'"^■■^^ "^Z ^^^ %/ f^^ " ^^^^ /"% ^■^^^^•' /^o ^?%^:^ 0^"%. '&. ^^•- ^'\ ■■^.- /\ =.»#!•• .^^'% '-ym-' / ^.'^ V* -•A . ,V' > - s " ' \^ ,* i-s^ 0- i'""- o^ .4.-' W c • ^:55^-.^,.'^, > ^y-e'^ -.v\/ C ■'so- ^V \-- .0- ^2 .-?•' ^-^ ^"'•^>, '.. °-i .0 •^ .^^-^xIX', -^^ ,..^?> /..■ •-^ /hl' ■■ G «- ■P I. A'-' . .,0' -^. ,~' .0^ V^- ^\:;^ (■" ^ ,\'" A .:.'■ ,G^ ■-^' , .^ './- , .0' .'^'V'!. V ■5 -■', ^ DOBBS BROS. fc \ r IIBRAHV BINDING O .0- ,■>'/* O. .'>•' .»■'".. ■•^•. !"ST, AUGUSTINE .-• ^ •■>, V- >^> ' '- ^^■ LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 020 913 184 5