An Open Letter
To the President of the F United States
On
The Duty and Responsibility
By
STEWART E. BRUCETo the Readei־:
This “open letter” is addressed to President Harding, with the hope that he and those who support and surround him, will see the necessity of righting the wrongs of the Wilson administration, in obedience to the plain mandate of the American people as expressed on November 4, 1920. Otherwise, all indications point to his defeat, and this not because the return of the Democratic party is desired, but in obedience to the desire of inflicting punishment on one who failed to carry out the plain wishes of the American people.
This defeat, although well deserved, would be unfortunate, for the reason that were the American people to repudiate Mr. Harding and recall Democratic leadership, the assumption would be that we were returning again to Wilson’s “principles,” which would, although being far from the truth, misrepresent the real attitude of the people of this country.
Thus, fearing that the world would misconstrue the punishment of Harding, for the indorsement of Wilson, and yet having no “party” feelings in the matter, I would prefer to see Mr. Harding make reasonably good during the remaining portion of his term and be elected, than to have him defeated, and the world misconstrue the defeat and take it for a retraction of the verdict of the American people of November 4, 1920.
That Mr. Harding has not carried out the wishes of the American people as expressed in November, 1920, nor made any attempt to rectify many of the wrongs of his predecessor, even to those wrongs inflicted against fifteen millions of Germans who were dogged, slandered and maligned by false propaganda, and who went to Mr. Harding as one man in the election of 1920, for redress, and who will leave him in a body in 1924, as a just protest against his inaction, is evident to all observing men.
The startling accusations contained in this “open letter” are based on facts which should be known to all our citizens. These faces are set forth in two books which have a world-wide circulation, of which I am the author, namely, “The War Guilt and Peace Crime of the Entente Allies” and “The Ashes of Victory.” The former contains two hundred pages and shows clearly by unmistakable evidence, that the Entente Allies were even more guilty of bringing on the world war than Germany. “The Ashes of Victory” deals also with war guilt, but shows as well the ruin brought to the world by peace by victory instead of peace by reasonable compromise, which was prevented by America’s one-sided aid to the Allies. These books retail at $1.50 each, clothbound, but in order to substantiate the statements made in my open letter to the President, the facts that these books contain must be known to the reader, and therefore I will mail to any address either of those $1.50 books for only fifty cents each, or the two books for $1.00. The order at this special price must not be sent to the New York publishers, but direct to the author.
Yours sincerely,
STEWART E, BRUCE,
670 St. John Avenue, Pasadena, California.
) 6/¿}(J/ L6C5r^-670 St. John Avenue, Pasadena, California. May 8th, 1923
To the President,
Washington, D. C.
Mr. President:
The historian of the future, who will minutely and intimately depict the lives and characters of the American presidents, will refer particularly to two important hours in your political life. One of these hours will not be that in which the hand of fate, on the day of your nomination, mysteriously moved you within grasp of that crown which those titans, Henry Clay, Daniel Webster and James G. Blaine, stretched out their hands for in vain. Neither shall it be that hour, which, unless averted by an unseen miracle, will witness on a chill November day in 1924, the wreck of that ship of which you are the pilot, on the reefs built for your destruction, by a despairing and pnraged citizenry.
Mr. President, the first of these two hours of which the historian will take note, will be that one, in the little City of Marion, Ohio, when the pulsating wires from North and South, and East and West, announced that you were chosen to the exalted office of President of the United States, by eight millions of a majority.
, Mr. President, if you have a besetting sin, all will testify that it is not that of vanity. You knew that this was not a personal triumph, neither was it a party triumph. You knew that the party of which you were the leader, went to battle, waving the same faded and tattered banners that had often gone down to defeat before-no new slogan was emblazoned on its armor.
That hour, Mr. President, was the most important of your political life. Did you read its meaning and message, as you withdrew from the exultant din of the mob, on that night, to the seclusion of your own fireside?
Never in all the history of the American people, was their voice so clear and unmistakable. ¡Never were they in more accord as to their duty, ■never were they so united in publicly punishing a betrayer, and in consigning to obilivion not only this betrayer, but even to the visiting of his sins on that man, your opponent, who was so lost to discernment and decency as to seek to inherit and wear this man’s mantle of shame.
Tuesday, November 4tli, 1920, was a day of reckoning—the first opportunity the American people had, of putting the seal of infamy on their betrayer.
The people’s day had at last arrived—a day that they could use the ballot—
“A weapon that comes down as still As snowflakes fall upon the sod;
But executes a freeman’s will As lightning does the Will of God.”
Yes, the people’s day had at last arrived— when millions of now unbridled tongues could speak and pass judgment upon that man and those methods, that for four years had reduced the American people to a subservient, inert, unthinking mass—that had bound them hand and foot,
—2—and left them at the mercy of a million putrid profiteers; and that had let loose on them a legion of harpies, with powers even unthought of by the Inquisition; not to say being stampeded and blackjacked into a profitless, useless, criminal and vain-glorious war, that was conceived in an unseasoned, visionary and impractical brain, promoted by the tongue of vanity, and led to impro-tent results for humanity, by that ambition that always makes liars and perverts of men.
Mr. President, was their one hamlet, one city, or one state in this great nation, that failed on that day to add its voice to that mighty chorus of condemnation.
Tell me, Mr. President, what heed have you given to this wrathful expression of the nation? What have you done, with all the powers that were placed in your hands, to right the wrongs that were perpetrated by your predecessor—those wrongs that were inflicted in the sacred name of liberty and security—on a people that had surrendered by their ballot, under this so-called representative form of government, their liberties and their very lives, for four years? What have you done even infinitesimally different, during the years ■of your office, that your predecessor would not have done, had his term of office been arbitrarily extended for four years?
Your answer, is, indeed, not necessary. On Tuesday, November 4th 1922, after two years of your administration, the American people answered that question for you. And the evening of that day, historians will record, was the second important hour of your political career, had you taken to heart this plain rebuke of the American people, as they passed judgment on you and your administration.
The student of psychology would be interested to know how you viewed the political upheaval on November 4th, 1920; and the almost complete reversal of November 4th, 1922.
You certainly must have known that the former was a spirited and heated protest against Wilson and his would-be successor; and surely you were aware that the latter was a protest and warning leveled directly at yourself.
Either you failed to understand what was in the minds of the American people, when they spoke as one man on November 4th, 1920, or, having understood, you deliberately ignored it, and allowed the nation to protest in vain.
Really, Mr. President, it would be interesting to know just what you conceived was in the minds of the American people, when they overwhelmed the Democratic standard bearer—Wilson’s successor—on that memorable November 4th, 1920.
Is it possible that you misjudged the minds of the American people on that occasion? This is fair to presume, for the reason, that with but trifling exceptions, you have silently endorsed, acquiesced in, or condoned everything that Wilson did when he held the Presidency, or particularly the last four years of his incumbency.
Does it not occur to you that the wrathful action of the American people on November 4th, 1920, was due to some reprehensible action or
—3—actions of Wilson, during his last four years of office? That is fair to assume, is it not, Mr. President?
Now let us try to discern what that thing was, or what those things were, that gave the American people such offense as to lead them to destroy, with almost the hand of an avenging angel, when the first opportunity presented itself, everything that represented Wilson, looked like Wilson, or bore the Wilson label.
Now, the last time the American people were heard from, prior to the day of your election, when they were yet freemen, was in November, 1916, when after witnessing the European slaughter for two long years, they returned Wilson to office, because “he kept them out of the war,” and for the reason that he had piously promised to continue this country in the historic paths of peace.
And, Mr. President, one of the greatest betrayals of history, followed this election. To this is due your election, and the ignominious defeat of Wilson’s successor. Can anyone doubt it?
Wilson had scarcely been returned for a second term, than he began making preparation for America’s entry into the world conflict—wilfully ignoring the plainest, and most-assuring promises.
Before the people of this country were aware of it, their hands were tied and their tongues were stopped, and they were mercilessly bound to the wheels of a chariot, driven by this reckless betrayer, to the accompaniment of the screeches of the “yellow” press, the applause of the profiteers, and those vultures who would prey on a people that were either gagged, or the victims of an insane and perverted patriotism.
It must be admitted that the outstanding events of the Wilson second administration, were America’s declaration of war on Germany, the prosecution of that war, and some of the results of our participation in the struggle. All else were mere trifles. It is, therefore, fair to say that America’s wrathful judgment of November, 1920, on the Wilson administration, had little to do with trifles. Any other interpretation would he an insult to the intelligence of the American people. It was the people’s verdict regarding the war, the prosecution of that war, and the results of that war. It was a protest against that whole sordid and damnable business; both as to its declaration and prosecution, not speaking of its deplorable results, not only to America, but the civilized world.
They gave Wilson no credit for anything, even to the “achievment,” of sending three million armed men across the Atlantic, for they realized that a powerful ass, if laden with gold, can go almost, anywhere.
The pent-up feelings of America were let loose on election day of Novembei4 ־th, 1920—those feelings that were outraged and suppressed for four long years. And what student of psychology could have anticipated a different verdict from an outraged people?
The great mass of the American people had no stomach for a participation in Europes sordid
—4—struggle. There were millions in this country, even before America entered the war, who were conscience-stricken that this country should profit by adding fuel to the European flames. They realized to the full that America should and would be held accountable, at the bar of history, for sending those supplies for the sake of profit, which so favored one group in the contest, as to make compromise impossible.
Now, the actions of men are determined by events—great events are usually followed by great actions. The ordinary course of nature, like the prairie, makes no call on the superman, and not until the mountain, the mighty gorge, or the torrential river is reached, does nature summons her titans, and then history is made. Events make opportunity, and opportunity makes a man as great or as little as he will, and history will record that you chose the latter. No action on your part, would give even a hint, that the greatest events of all history have just transpired, and that civilization, even at this hour, is trembling on the brink of an abyss.
And, Mr. President, what is it that has prevented you from reaching the height of your great opportunity—an opportunity for greatness and good only vouchsafed to but one other man in history—your discredited predecessor? What is it that has prevented you from becoming the Lincoln of humanity—the preserver of not only liberty, but civilization itself; and what is it that eventually will be credited with consigning you to the same obscure place in the Hall of Fame, as that occupied by Andy Johnson and R. B. Hayes? Mr. President, the answer that history will make to that question, can be made now. It can be written in a sentence. And it will be recorded that you stultified yourself, that you bound yourself to the earth by acquiescing in the lie of the ages, namely, that Germany alone was guilty of the World War, with all its horrors; and being guilty must be punished and made the slave of the victors. That lie has tied your tongue, bound your hands, wrecked peace conferences, made devils of women, cowards of men, and brutes of mankind.
Frankly, one cannot observe your actions, or rather non-action, despair and pity. Manifestly it is the truth, particularly in your case, that great opportunities are rare, and rarer still are those who are equipped to take advantage of them.
There is no one disposed to hold you responsible for the war sins and peace crimes of Woodrow Wilson, but your countrymen in particular, and humanity in general, are holding you, and will hold you to account for not using the powers placed in your hands, in so far as possible, to nullify and counteract these crimes.
There is not a boy old enough to whittle his initials on the pine desk of a little red school-house, who is not vaguely conscious that the world’s procession, in its endeavor to move towards peace and sanity, is help up by that monster known as “The Peace of Versailles.” It is the hand of death laid upon the victors and vanquished, alike; having for its basis the blackest false-
—5—hood that ever crawled from the lowest caverns of hell, namely, that Germany alone was guilty, and her enemies innocent.
You have persisted in acquiescing in this perversion of the truth in the face of the plain and unmistakable declaration of the American people, solemnly registered on November 4tli, 1920 and on November 4th, 1916. Even on November 4th, 1916, the majority of the American people, with many facts hidden from them that became known later, firmly believed that their flag should not be dragged in to the sordid and polluting European struggle, as millions knew only too well the characters of the different belligerents.
You know that the American people were told by that man in whom they had put their trust, and that as late as November, 1916, that America had neither reason nor right to take part in the world conflagration. In this the people mainly agreed. And how much more would they have been of this opinion had they known at the time that the Lusitania was a munition ship, laden with projectiles for German destruction; or had they generally known that the invasion of Belgium was condoned by Theodore Roosevelt as a military necessity, and that in the following words— “When a nation feels that the issue of a contest in which, from whatever reason, it finds itself engaged will be national life or death, it is inevitable that it should act so as to save itself from death and to perpetuate its life. . . . What has been done in Belgium has been done in accordance with what the Germans unquestionable and sincerely believed to be the course of conduct necessitated by Germany’s struggle for life; ” or yet had they known, as they now know, the falsity of the deluge of atrocity lies that inundated the country for the base and diabolical purpose of blackening a great people in the eyes of mankind.
They were alive to the fact that if America had no reason to enter the European struggle up to November 4th, 1916, she certainly had no reason afterwards—no reason that could have for a basis the claims of justice or the dictates of humanity. No obligation of justice, self-preservation, respect, or duty to mankind dictated America’s course as she entered the war, led by that man, who, until he was re-elected, pledged his word and honor to keep America out of the conflict.
History will record, to the credit of the American people, that war was declared on Germany without their consent; nay, against their emphatic demand to the contrary.
When history is written as a judge and not as a mirror, it will record that when America declared war it was not a free people that spoke, or even a people at all, but a temporary autocracy of government which took advantage of place and circumstance, to exploit a people, outrage it’s will, and act, not in accordance with that will, but in obedience to personal vanity and vainglorious ambition, backed by those who would exploit and capitalize for personal gain, a people by reason of a world conflagration.
If we take as being true, Wilson’s oft repeated words delivered on various occasions up to No-
—6—vember 4th, 1916, that America had neither right nor business in the world contest, (a statement that voiced the sentiment of the American people, then), in view of this, how can we face the final judgment of mankind, when our actions will be judged by the immutable standards of right and wrong, when we seriously consider the pretext that Wilson seized upon to plunge this country into war.
In this, had we judged ourselves sincerely, and Germany charitably, we never would have found it in our hearts to take advantage of the circumstance that we did, for our declaration of war on these people.
And what was the pretext seized upon by Wilson, to hurl the powers of this great nation, against a war-jaded people, already surrounded by the most powerful nations of the earth? The answer that must be given to that question, should and will bring the blush of shame to every American lover of fair play and justice, when it sinks into his consciousness, the full significance of the action of this Government of that day. And the answer to that question will be, that America demanded, on penalty of a declaration of war, that Germany practically surrender the use of the submarine, the only weapon she had at her disposal, of breaking England’s starvation blockade, and preventing the avalanche of munitions from the shores of America, reaching those who were bent on German destruction. The full significance of this will come home to us when we remember that Germany had at the time, and previously, made overtures for a peace conference, and that she had repeatedly offered to surrender this defensive weapon, the moment England would forego the starvation of German women and children, in order to, cowardly, reach the German soldier on the firing line.
Mr. President, I ask you sincerely, what evidence have we, that you appreciate America’s responsibility for her participation in the war, and as a result of this participation, a complete physical victory for the Allies, instead of what every sane man of today realizes should have resulted—a compromise.
The French are in the Ruhr today, strangling and paralyzing the industry of Europe and outraging decency, and that without a word of protest on your part, basing your non-action, on the convenient belief, the childish belief, yea, the criminal and cowardly belief—namely, that Germany was solely guilty for the crime of the war and therefore should be punished.
When the conflict is over, it is then that history brings us to a right understanding. When the conflict is on, the gold and the dross is then thrown up in confusion; but history sifts the gold from the dross—then truth gleams forth to all who would open their eyes to see, and their hearts to understand.
Insofar as you are concerned, European past and present history has been written in vain; for no man who views this great pageant with an eye and a soul, and who is prepared to understand the meaning of events and their application to
• —7—mankind, could fail to know that this history is written in blood on tablets of crime.
The question of war guilt is of so much importance that I would call your attention to some facts—although I suspect that you already know these facts and their meaning—but conveniently ignore them, lest their serious contemplation would impel you to a course of action, the results of which, on your political future, you are not as yet, of a substantial mind.
Some of these facts, even though briefly outlined, may for you prove to be the key to other facts, facts which may open the door to a treasure house, rich by comparison to the one you now occupy, strewn as it is by dead mens bones—the bones of the “fathers” that you at times so reverently and affectionately cherish.
Mr. President, in this brief inquiry, let us begin with the French occupation of the Ruhr, an occupation that was made possible by the physical victory in which America shared ,which gave France the upper hand in Europe; due in part to your want of firmness and prospective when France, with some hesitation, announced she was to take this high-handed and dastardly step.
No one seriously doubts that France is in the Ruhr today by your tacit consent, secretly given. You justified the action of Franec on two grounds, both of which are historically and morally false; that is to protect herself against future attacks from a wanton, dangerous and criminal neighbor, and to collect righteous damages.
Now, Mr. President, if you have read history, even that covered by your own short span of life, you will know the falseness of the claim, that by comparison, Germany is and was a criminal neighbor.
You know that the German peoples were repeatedly outraged and over-run by militaristic France during the past one hundred and fifty years. You know, or should know, that the war of 1870 was forced on Germany, without the slightest provocation, and in obedience to arrogant and imperialistic designs. If you doubt out plain “histories on that point, turn to the files of every American newspaper of that day, and those of England as well, and know the truth.
You will know then, too, that, in the settlement of that war, victorious Germany only took back Provinces that were stolen by a French king 100 years previously, and assesed prosperous France one billion dollars, a sum that during the late war, you no doubt, fervently described as outrageously oppressive, and yet you conveniently condoned a levy, under the Treaty of Versailles, which France now seeks to collect, of thirty-two times by volume, and twenty times as much in proportion to population, as the former “outrageous” amount, and that after robbing these people of their ships, their colonies, their outlying Provinces, and their coal and iron.
How is it possible that you can still cling to the myth of Germany’s sole responsibility for the war, which forms the basis for punitive damages, reprisals, and invasions, when you, of all men, are
—8—in a position to know facts which would controvert such a palpable libel.
To support this erroneous contention, it has been shouted from the housetops that Germany prepared for 40 years, for a war, for world conquest. There is as much truth in that statement, and no more, than the atrocity slanders that Sir Phillip Gibbs, one-time British propagandist, now gives the lie to; or no more truth than the submarine “atrocities” that Admiral William Sims, of the United States Navy, on April 3rd, at the City Club in Los Angeles, manfully controverts in the following language:
“There is no authentic record of an atrocity ever having been perpetrated by a Commander and crew of a German submarine. The press accounts of the ‘terrible atrocities’ were nothing but propaganda.”
If it were not for your spoken words, and still more by your silence, both of which are giving validity to this lie regarding Germany’s sole guilt, I should imagine that Admiral Sims’ belated confession would bring the blush of shame to your face, not only for the Press that perpetrated these falsehoods, but also for the Government of which you were a member, for its connivance in the dissemination of these falsehoods.
Is it possible, Mr. President, that you do not know that in nearly every year during the decade preceding 1914, the allied nations opposed to Germany and Austria, spent more money on their army preparation, their war preparation, than the Central powers, and the very year preceding the war, France and Russia alone spent Five Hundred and Seventy Millions on preparing their armies for war, against a total expenditure of Four Hundred and Sixty Millions by Germany and Austria combined; and that was not counting an army expenditure by England, of One Hundred and Forty Millions during that year, which expenditure was for the benefit, and remained at the disposal of a combined France and Russia, in their contemplated movements against Germany.
When we consider the question of preparation for war, we must not forget that the Entente, that is, Russia, England and France, spent on naval preparations, during the late years before 1914, four dollars for every dollar expended by the Central Powers. And money expenditure, is almost the full measure of preparations for war, whether these preparations be for attack of defence. Judging by these figures, Germany was less guilty than her enemies, and the charge that she unduly prepared, must fall to the ground.
This question of war guilt is of such importance, and the evil of holding and perpetuating the belief, that Germany alone was guilty, as well as that she on the one side, represented barbarism, and the Entente everything that was Christian, that I would lengthen this communication beyond the limits intended, if only that I could bring home to you, that this unsupported belief—this cruel and cowardly belief—must be removed before peace can be established, not only in Europe, but in America, and real reconstruction begin.
I hold no brief for Germany or the Germany —9—Kaiser, when I endeavor to bring facts to you, which are showing more clearly every day, that the Governments opposed to Germany, cannot appear before the final court of mankind, much less a Higher Tribunal, with clean hands.
Calmly, judiciously and honestly visualize Europes’ condition of August, 1914, and immediately preceding.
Visualize Germany, with her sixty-five million population, by every standard the most progressive people in Europe, occupying the geographical center of the continent, with no natural defences, wedged in on one side by one hundred and eighty million Russians who were at the call of an ambitious despot; and on the other side by forty millions of the most revengeful and war-like people to be found anywhere on earth, and these powerful nations in an offensive and defensive pact of the most exacting and disquieting character, and back of these cruel and irresponsible powers sat Great Britain, perhaps the most powerful nation on earth, counseling them, conniving with them, always ready, always waiting for that continental collision which would afford her the fell opportunity of robbing Germany of her navy and destroying her as a commercial rival.
We in America cannot have the least comprehension of this menace, the responsibility that it entailed for the German rulers, and the terror when the hour struck for its consummation—a consummation that in so far as England was concerned—meant a navyless and prostrate commercial rival; for France the return of Alsace Lorraine, and for Russia, supremacy in the Balkans, with an empire extending from the Arctic to the blue waters of the Mediterranian.
Now, Mr. President, there is another important phase of this great question that we must consider—almost as important as that of the guilt of starting the war, namely the guilt of continuing the struggle until what history will unanimously characterize as a fool’s victory.
Ask yourself seriously, what is the world suffering from today, and the answer, if righteously given, must be that we are suffering from the results of the so-called victory—the continuation of the struggle until the brutal will of one group was exerted over another; and that without regard to repeated offers of compromise, the dictates of humanity, and the spirit of the religion of Jesus Christ.
The evil results of that “victory” will not be computed one hundred years after this generation has passed from the earth.
A faint glimpse of this evil and its preposterous nature will come home to humanity when it is fully realized that the war was carried on for a period of at least three years beyond when Germany sincerely offered to end the struggle on a basis of fair compromise as between equals—offers that were repeatedly spurned without any test oi their sincerety, resulting in an additional waste of thirty millions of lives and three hundred billions of treasure.
And, Mr. President, I ask you sincerely, what did the world gain by this victory, over and above —10—a reasonable compromise—a gain to compensate for this thirty million extra lives and three hundred billions in treasure? Absolutely nothing; and not only this, but you see substituted in central Europe a starved, hopeless and desperate people, and an unstable and tottering government, for a prosperous, happy and law-abiding people, and a government that in many ways elicted not only the respect but the admiration of the world—a government, aside from its non-representative form, took care of its people and scrupulously and honorably met every international obligation.
The crime of prolonging the war beyond when a reasonable compromise, as between equals, should should have ended it, will, in a large measure be brought home to America, by reason of that substantial support that we gave from the beginning, for gain, to the Allies, and our participation later, which so encouraged and supported one group, as to make compromise, the thing of all things desirable, impossible.
To atone for this ignoble part in the worlds tragedy, and to, insofar as possible, undo the wrongs of the Wilson administration, I ask you, in unison with millions of your countrymen, to use the great powers that are vested in you to assist Europe in lifting herself out of the hell hole which she is now floundering, which is the result of that peace by victory, which America alone, made possible.
Mr. President, we cannot shift this responsibility—a responsibility that comes as a result of our endeavor in the beginning to make blood profits out of the tragedy of the nations, and later, the securing of these profits by our participation in the struggle not to speak of our share in officially being a party to the most damned and damnable “peace” settlement of which mankind has any record.
Mr. President, no League of Nations, no world court, no economic conference, will avail until the mind of the world is set in order by the truth— the truth regarding the guilt of all those who made the world war possible; and the guilt of those who, for lust of conquest, power and revenge, carried the contest years beyond the natural day of conciliation and compromise, to one of world bankruptcy, and almost the wreck of civilization itself.
As a result of peace by victory there was born into the world that abortion known as the League of Nations, something the American people wisely would neither father nor adopt because they realized that it was conceived in lust and born in iniquity, and if it ever reached maturity would be but the willing slave of those who brought it into being—the conquerors.
The same fate will befall your proposed world court, unless the neutrals of that court, as their first act, and to clear the minds of the world, passes judgment on the question of war guilt. The American people will view the question of participation in a world court with skepticism, remembering our association with European leadership culminating with the Peace of Versailles; and, no doubt, will incline, for guidance, to the
—11—adage, that those who lie down with dogs must expect to carry־ away fleas.
Neither a League of Nations or World Court are necessary instruments in the hands of America whereby she do her duty to humanity, at this all-important juncture, if we but sincerely take that leadership that our resources and importance demand of us.
Without a participation in the League of Nations or making use of the World Court, we can take independent action and assume a leadership that promises more, by reason of our free hand, than would be possible by being hampered by European prejudices and entanglements; therefore I respectfully submit, roughly, for the solution of some of the pressing problems that confront us, the following program:
(A)	Without delay invite all neutral nations —those that did not participate in the World War —to send representatives, who would become members of a court which would have for its sole duty the appraising of war guilt and placing it where it properly belongs. To this end they could send commissions to the different countries to investigate, question witnesses, examine archives, etc. This information could be compiled and printed and the findings of the court set forth.
This body could pass on, among various other phases, the following: (1) Are there evidences to show that Germany was out for world conquest in 1914.	(2) Was her military preparation in ex-
cess of ligitimate demands necessitated by the combined war strength of an allied France and Russia. (3) Considering the accepted importance of the “first blow,” was Germany within reason and justification in delivering a hasty ultimatum to Russia when that nation had one million, two hundred thousand armed men near the German border, ready to strike a blow. (4) In view of Russia’s menacing attitude, and knowing her close relations with France, was Germany justified, when war with Russia seemed inevitable, of presenting an ultimatum to France demanding that she show her hand. (5) Was the invasion of Belgium justified on the grounds of military necessity, as laid down by Theodore Roosevelt when he declared as follows: “What has been done in Belgium has been done in accordance with what the Germans unquestionably and sincerely believed to be the course of conduct necessitated by Germany’s struggle for life.” (6) Was Germany, owing to her rapidly growing foreign trade, ligiti-mately entitled to a formidable navy, without being charged, on that account, with a desire to dominate the world. (7) What was the condition of the German people, under German rule, as compared with the peoples of England, France and Russia. (8) Was Germany guilty of atrocities, and to what extent were these exaggerated by propaganda, and for what purpose, and what evil to the world resulted from this propaganda.
(9) Would Russia have mobilized in July, 1914 had she not the active backing of France and the secret support of Great Britian? (10) Was —12—Russia’s sole purpose, in mobilizing, the protection of Serbia, or had she other designs and used this as a pretext, for a greater adventure? (11) Smarting under Japanese defeat, did or did not Russia, after several years of intensive preparation, use the circumstances of July, 1914 to put in motion her vast armies, in order to redeem herself and restore her military prestige before the eyes of the world.
(12) Was France, in 1914, a force for peace, when she clearly saw an opportunity, as a result of a struggle between Germany and Russia, of wresting Alsace Lorraine from Germany? (13) Knowing that Russia, mobilization would bring Germany into the conflict, are there any evidences that France counselled moderation on the part of Russia?
(14) Did England take any sincere means of stopping Russian mobilization — the thing that brought a war ultimatum from Germany? (15) If England did not take such means, thus allowing Russia and Germany to drift into war, was she, or was she not, induced by the belief, that as a result of a Continental war, two things of benefit would accrue to the British people—the destruction of the German navy, and the wiping out of Germany as a commercial rival?
(16)	Could a government be deemed either neutral or Christian that would allow its people, for inordinate gain, as the American Government did, to create a new national industry which had for its object the supplying of the means for a large portion of a Continent to commit suicide?
(17)	What of the consistency of the Wilson government in announcing, piously, early in the struggle, that it would not loan gold to the belligerents, because this would be an unneutral act, and later extend credits to one side in the contest for the reason that these credits called for goods at 300 per cent profit—not gold at 5 per cent interest.
(18)	Was the submarine aimed by the German leaders at America, in a hostile way, and to give offence, or was it employed by Germany solely to break England’s starvation blockade, and to prevent the flood of American munitions, intended for German destruction, from reaching France and England?
(19)	If the submarine was employed for the latter purpose, had America a moral right to demand, on penalty of war, that Germany give up this defensive weapon? (20) What influence had America’s unfailing supply of munitions on deciding the Allies to reject all German peace proposals? (21) If, by America’s material support, for gain, peace by negotiation and agreement was made impossible, should America be held financially as well as morally, responsible to the European peoples, for the continuance of the war beyond when a reasonable compromise was possible? (22) If all are found guilty of making the war possible, should the Treaty of Versailles be annulled? (23 Should Germany be found solely guilty and the other nations innocent, what revision of that Treaty should be recommended, to do justice to the injured nations and be within
—13—the power of the German people to pay and vice versa. (24) Should all be adjudged guilty, and in view of the fact that the battles were fought on Belgian and French soil, what part of this damage, for the purpose of equalization, should be met by Germany and England, and by America, if she be found guilty of the crime of prolonging the war beyond the time for a fair compromise?
(25) Was America influenced in declaring war on Germany by reason of the possibility that the Allies would not be victorious and therefore would be unable to pay their indebtedness to׳ this country?
(B)	Simultaneously, with the assembling of a neutral court to pass on war guilt, etc., an economic conference of American economists should be convened for the purpose of dealing with the question of war debts, and America’s economic relation to Europe.
This conference could determine whether these twelve billions of American foreign claims might not be properly designated as liabilities instead of assets—whether or not their existence will not prove a menace to the world’s tranquility, a paralyzing hand on the peoples that are charged with these debts, and a curse instead of a blessing on the people that would exact, or seek to exact, payment.
There are millions of righteous-thinking men and women, not only in America, but throughout the whole civilized world, who feel that these claims have an unrighteous basis, that they are branded with the slimey hand of the profiteer, that they are an accumulation snatched from those who were engaged in a mad life and death struggle, that they represent neither charity nor justice, but are the partial measure of that blood that flowed from the gapping wounds made in the bodies of the flower of European manhood, by those American engines of destruction, measured by twelve billions of dollars, all of which went forward, on their hellish mission, long after the conscience of the neutral world deemed that the contest should have ended by compromise and conciliation.
Such an economic conference, as the one proposed, must examine these war debts, both from a material and moral viewpoint. Even on the sordid grounds of selfish interests, not to speak of the moral aspects, we are impelled to the conclusion that these debts must be cancelled. This is true without even a thought of those upon whom this colossal burden rests.
Now, how were these debts created? By Europe’s call on the farm, factory and productive man-power of America to supply her wants, over and above her ability, through the wasteage of war, to return payment in kind. An unhealthy and unnatural trade balance was thus created. In other words, these debts were created by the failure of the farm, factory and productive manpower of Europe, during the period of the war, to balance by reciprocity, the farm, factory and manpower of America.
It is evident that the only way by which this —14—stupendous trade balance can be met, is by Europe, in the future, to send us here products—her farm, factory and man-power in excess of the products of our farms and factories to the extent of twelve thousand millions of dollars, not counting interest.
Now, while Europe was unnaturally receiving this excess, two-thirds of her man-power ceased to be producers; they were not only idlers, but they were destroyers. It is therefore evident that if Europe is ever to pay us, in the only way possible for her, that is in products in excess of what she normally takes from us, a large portion of our population, while absorbing this excess over our exports, must become idlers or destroyers.
Can we, Mr. President, either economically or morally afford to have the mouths of a large portion of our population filled and their backs covered while they remain in idleness or engage in the pursuits of destruction, even if that were possible?
But you say we will make them pay in gold—■ we will put up our tariff wall sufficiently high to keep their excess products out.
Mr. President, the above has been your viewpoint and in strict accord with your policy — a policy that will go down in history as being the most stupid, short-sighted, selfish and cowardly ever conceived and adhered to by a man or a government claiming any knowledge of economics, much less filled with a desire that justice shall prevail.
God pity those who are so blind as not to see the evil that has resulted and is resulting from this ignoble procedure!
Daily you are sucking by your gold exactions and importations that which gives life and vitality to Europe’s circulating medium and the medium of exchange, driving thèse people to chaos and and bankruptcy and not only this, you are adding these exactions to a domestic gold supply far in excess of its useful and healthy limits. You are sucking the precious heart blood from an already emaciated and impoverished body, and you are transfusing it into the veins of a body already swollen with an abundance of the golden life fluid. You take away but you add nothing; you create a valley of despair by your endeavor to make a mountain; and the height of that mountain can only be measured by the depth of the valley.
Mr. President, if by the hand of magic, you could turn the Washington monument into gold, you would not add one penny to the real worth of this land—you would make less precious, therefore, less valuable the gold supply we already possess. So it is with that, to us, debasing stream of gold which is not enriching us, but making Europe poor, indeed.
Therefore, it would be the duty of this economic conference to devise a plan, and on what terms, that at least one and a half billions of our gold supply be returned to Europe, so that this gold may form the basis for their monetary reconstruction, and at the same time make more
—15—healthy the underlying basis of our own monetary system.
(C) After the neutral court for the placing of war guilt, and the American economic conference should have reached their findings, a world peace conference should be immediately convened, pledged to accept the verdict of this neutral court, and insofar as possible, be guided by the findings of the economic conference.
If the interested powers will not accept a neutral court for adjudging war guilt, what hope can you have for your proposed world court, unless it be that you are willing that the powerful interests shall have the right to decide their own cases, and the cases of the weaker ones as well.
The great problem for a world peace conference is how the nations may get along without force—without the arbitrament of war. Governments, not peoples, make war. Will the American Government lead the way to the surrendering of the war-making power to those who have to shed their blood and pay the price. Will you support that principle by advocating that no government shall have the right of declaring war and sending its armies across its own border into an alien territory, without first submitting such a proposal to its people; reserving the right, in case of an attack, to immediately use all the powers of the government to meet and repell this attack.
Mr. President, the task you are called to is great—the burden that you must take up will be heavy. It is upon you that the weight will fall; and by you, the almost devine iniative must be taken of leading the world out of the wilderness —out of chaos into the promised land of brotherhood and peace.
The past cannot be recalled. The great betrayal has done its evil work, which a century cannot efface. You cannot, with all the titantic powers at your disposal, restore to America two hundred thousand slain sons who were torn from their homes and loved ones to fight for world peace and democracy, and as they lie in their last sleep, their moldering graves are shaken by the tread of tramping armies, flushed by that victory that these lives made possible, as they march to put in slavery that great people that a war for democracy had promised to forever liberate.
Mr. President, you cannot wipe out the stains of this betrayal, or the tears that it caused, but you can lead the way, by the torch of truth, to that sanity which will dispel world-encircling hate and make possible world reconstruction.
Yours very sincerely,