TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 \ 1 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 n 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 
 UNITED STATES SENATE 
 
 SIXTY-SIXTH CONGRESS 
 
 FIRST SESSION 
 
 PART 17 
 
 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 GOVERNMENT TRINTING OFFICE 
 1919 
 
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 
 
 HENRY CABOT LODGE, Massachusetts, Chairman. 
 
 PORTER J. HcCTTMBER, North Dakota. 
 WILLIAM E. BORAH, Idaho. 
 
 FRANK B. BRANDEGEE, Connecticut. 
 ALBERT B. FALL, New Mexico. 
 PHILANDER C. KNOX, Pennsylvania. 
 WARREN G. HARDING, Ohio. 
 
 HIRAM W. JOHNSON, California. 
 HARRY S. NEW, Indiana. 
 
 GILBERT M. HITCHCOCK, Nebraska. 
 JOHN SHARP WILLIAMS, Mississippi. 
 CLAUDE A. SWANSON, Virginia. 
 ATLEE POMERENE, Ohio. 
 
 MARCUS A. SMITH, Arizona. 
 
 KEY PITTMAN, Nevada. 
 
 JOHN K. SHIELDS, Tennessee 
 
 GEORGE H. MOSES, New Hampshire. 
 
 Charles F. Redmond, Clerk. 
 
 H 
 

 ^ 0.1117 
 
 SATURDAY, AUGUST 30, 1919. 
 
 United States Senate, 
 Committee on Foreign Relations, 
 
 Washington , D. C. 
 
 The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 o’clock a. m. ? 
 in room 426 Senate Office Building, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge 
 presiding. 
 
 Present: Senators Lodge (chairman), Borah, Brandegee, Fall, 
 Knox, Harding, Johnson, New, Moses, Swanson, and Pittman. 
 
 The Chairman. The committee will be in order, please. Judge 
 Cohalan, we will hear you now. Unfortunately our time is limited, 
 and we can give only two hours,.as we have to hear representatives 
 of Greece for an hour afterwards. Judge Cohalan, I leave it to you 
 to arrange the time for the different speeches. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL F. COHALAN, JUSTICE OF THE 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, 
 acting on behalf of those who are here to represent the great bulk 
 of the 20,000,000 of the Irish element in this country, we have 
 arranged a program which with your permission we will carry 
 through in the order w T e have fixed, if possible, taking only the time 
 you have allotted to us. If we may have to call upon you for a few 
 minutes extra, we are going to ask you to indulge us in it if you will. 
 
 We are opposed to the proposed league of nations for man} 7 rea¬ 
 sons, all of which we believe are of great weight and importance to 
 the interests of our country. We object, in the first place, to the 
 proposal to establish what we believe to be a superstate to which 
 shall be delegated or turned over powers that belong to the sovereign 
 United States of America. We believe that that is an infringement 
 upon the sovereignty of the country and is an interference with its 
 liberty, and because of that we most strongly oppose the establish¬ 
 ment of any such body. 
 
 • We believe it to be an affront to America to suggest even that in 
 
 » any such proposed league of nations as is coming before us 
 
 that any country, no matter how friendly it may claim to be to 
 America, should have six votes as compared to the one vote of 
 
 # America. We believe that' would be an affront to the intelligence of 
 the people of America and a very decided injury to America if any 
 such scheme were to go through. 
 
 We are opposed to this proposed league of nations because of the 
 fact that under it we believe the old American doctrine of the free¬ 
 dom of the seas, for which America has stood all through its history, 
 Is not taken care of in any way, but that, on the contrary, the matter 
 
 135549°—19 757 
 
758 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 lias been arranged in such manner as to turn over to England, 
 without protest, the control of the oceans of the world. 
 
 We call your attention to the fact that because of the extraor¬ 
 dinary development of our industrial conditions we manufacture in 
 less than 8 months of every year what w^e would consume in 12 
 months, and that as a consequence of that, for 4 months in the year 
 we are dependent for a market, and for an output for our factories, 
 upon our foreign trade. We insist that under the conditions that 
 would obtain if this proposed league of nations were to go through 
 we would be left in a position where we could carry on such trade, 
 not as the matter of right which we now enjoy, for which we fought, 
 and our forefathers before us fought, and which we have always 
 enjoyed during the history of our country, but as a privilege extended 
 to us by the nation which controlled the sea. We say this in no spirit 
 of hostility to England. We would take the same position if any 
 other country were put in the position of controlling the sea. We 
 insist that for tire interest of America it is absolutely requisite that 
 no power should be able to control the ocean through the system of 
 navalism any more than anv country divided should control all the 
 land under the system of militarism. 
 
 We believe we went to war for the purpose of ending autocracy 
 and all that that means, and that it means not alone militarism, the 
 control of the land, but also navalism, the control of the oceans of 
 the world. We say that if we could carry on our commerce only 
 so long as the opportunity to do so was extended to us as a matter 
 of privilege by any nation, no matter how friendly that nation 
 might claim to be, we could in no way build up our commerce 
 or build up our industry on any permanent basis at all, because 
 our commerce would be subject to the whim, or subject to the 
 interest, or subject to the passion of the hour, as it might appeal to 
 any other nation, or to any combination of nations together; and 
 we point out with relation to that that we do not believe this war 
 will have been properly won; that is, that the interests of America 
 will have been properly taken care of as a consequence of the winning 
 of the war as we insist that it was won, because of the contribution 
 made by America, in spite of all that may be said by the other coun¬ 
 tries and the contributions they made, and the interests of Amer¬ 
 ica and the interests of mankind will not be properly safe¬ 
 guarded so long as any one nation of any combination of nations 
 is left in possession and control of the sea, and able to interfere with 
 the commerce that should be carried on in a normal way between 
 all the free-trading countries of the world, all the countries that 
 want to carry on commerce with one another and to have friendly 
 business relations with one another. 
 
 We believe the British fleet in its position of predominant power 
 to-day is a menace to the commerce of the United States. We say 
 that it no longer can be a weapon in the hands of England as against 
 Germany, because Germany has been put in a position where it can 
 in no way compete with England, where it has been deprived of its 
 navy entirely. 
 
 We say the same thing with relation to Bussia. We say that 
 it can not be held in any way to be used as a weapon against France, 
 because France, through the action of her statesmen and the stress 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 759 
 
 of circumstances, has practically been taken into the continental 
 vassalage of England. We say under those conditions that the Eng¬ 
 lish fleet can be directed or used as a weapon of menace against 
 nobody except the United States of America, and we point out that 
 even though, as many Englishmen contend, it is only a matter of coin¬ 
 cidence it is a fact that at any time when any country has put itself or 
 been put in the position of being an economic rival or being an indus¬ 
 trial competitor of England ruin has overtaken that country in every 
 way; and we say in the interest of a just and permanent peace, if it 
 can be made under these conditions at all, it can be made only by 
 taking care to see that England should not be put in a position where 
 she can menace the commerce of the United States, and menace the 
 commerce of the world, whenever it suits her interest or whenever 
 it suits her whim to do so. We suggest with relation to that, that 
 in any peace that should be made precaution should be taken to 
 see that there be a general disarmament not only on land but 
 also on sea, so that there will be actual freedom of all the world and 
 not freedom simply of part of the world. 
 
 We point out the importance of Ireland in any scheme that would 
 practically bring about the fredom of the sea. We say, again in no 
 spirit of hostility to England at all, but only taking conditions into 
 account as they exist, that England can not continue to be the domi¬ 
 nant power of the earth; that England can not continue to control 
 the world unless she controls the sea, and that her continued control 
 of the sea is dependent upon her continued control of Ireland; and 
 we say that she can make no better contribution to the general free¬ 
 dom of the world, she can give no better evidence of her desire to 
 make a just and durable and permanent peace, than by consenting 
 to the disarmament of this fleet, which now is so very much larger 
 than the fleet of any other nation or practically any combination of 
 nations. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Do you object to being asked a question, or 
 do you want to proceed without interruption ? 
 
 Judge Coiialan. I do not mind, at all. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I wanted, if it would not interrupt the 
 continuity of your thought, to have you state a little more in detail 
 what you mean when you say that the continued supremacy of the 
 sea depends upon this control of Ireland by England. I did not 
 quite get it. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. For your consideration, I would present the geo¬ 
 graphical position of Ireland with relation to England, the thing to 
 which you remember George Washington referred when he said 
 that if Ireland were 500 miles from England there would be no Irish 
 question. When you think of the relation of Ireland to England, 
 you see it puts England in a place where she can control the ocean, 
 as she can not control the ocean unless she controls Ireland. While it 
 is true that England made last year $225,000,000 out of the control 
 of Ireland, the real secret for insisting upon keeping her control of 
 Ireland is that she wants to be able to control the seas. She can do 
 that because of the geographical position of Ireland only if she con¬ 
 trols Ireland. iYou will remember that you can not approach the 
 southern coast of England without passing the southern coast of 
 Ireland, and can not approach the northern coast of England without 
 passing the northern coast of Ireland. Under the circumstances, 
 England is going to insist on control of Ireland. 
 
760 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 As I sav, she can make no greater contribution to the freedom 
 of the world, can give no greater evidence of the desire to bring 
 about a just and permanent peace, than to give her consent to having 
 the republican form of government which has been set up in Ireland 
 recognized by herself as well as the other nations of the world. 
 
 Passing from that we contend that we must as Americans take a 
 position in opposition to this proposed league of nations because of 
 what it does with relation to the Monroe doctrine. We insist that 
 the Monroe doctrine is one of the fundamental principles upon which 
 American power has been reared, and that our foreign policv has 
 recognized it as the great principle of American statesmanship, of 
 American interests, and if this peace convention is going to give its 
 attention to the settling of all problems in the future so as to do away 
 with the probability of some great war occurring in the world, it 
 ought to take into question conditions as they have existed'up to the 
 present time, and then the interests of America are the first thing that 
 should be looked out for by those who represent and speak for 
 America. 
 
 We point out that under the Monroe doctrine, as it has been estab¬ 
 lished, we have grown in wealth, prosperity, and power as no nation 
 in the history of the world lias grown. And we say that the Monroe 
 doctrine if it is to be changed should be changed not in the way of 
 diminishing its power, but in the way of strengthening its power. 
 If there shall be a desire to make a permanent peace, the Monroe 
 doctrine should be extended so that it shall include any European 
 interests in the Western Hemisphere. Any European country which 
 is' represented here by territory should depart. Since the Monroe 
 doctrine has been enunciated all the territory which is possessed in 
 western America by them has been given up by Denmark, France, 
 Russia, Spain, and Portugal, and the only power remaining in any 
 large way upon this hemisphere, the only European power possessing 
 territory of any extent in this country, is the British Empire, and we 
 say that if there is going to be a permanent settlement to come out 
 of these peace negotiations, the people of Canada, our great neigh¬ 
 bor on the north, ought to have submitted to them the question of 
 taking their place among the republics of the Western Hemisphere, 
 or even if an arrangement could be made of joining our country, and 
 in the same way the territory that England lias in the West Indies 
 should be turned over to America or turned over to the people 
 of those islands in order that there may be no further menace of 
 American commerce, so far as the Western Hemisphere is concerned. 
 
 We Irish think that there should be no abandonment of the policy 
 laid down by Washington in his Farewell Address of keeping away 
 from permanent entangling alliances with any of the countries of 
 the Old World. We point out that this has been the policy which 
 has been followed strictly by America and has resulted probably 
 more than anything else in strengthening the extraordinary posi¬ 
 tion we occupy to-day. As the Senator from Pennsylvania said so 
 well yesterday, the only great solvent power left, practically, on the 
 earth is the United States, and it is the duty of those representing 
 America to continue this policy, and we urge that in acting for the 
 welfare of America care should be taken to see that that doctrine 
 should be upheld, and that the advice of Washington should be con- 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 761 
 
 tinued and lived up to in such a way that we should neither take 
 part in the quarrels of the Old World nor permit them to take part 
 m our quarrels. 
 
 Coming down to specific things, as far as article 10 of the proposed 
 league of nations is concerned, Yve most emphatically protest against 
 that. Under it we are asked to make the greatest departure from 
 American traditions of statesmanship that has ever been made. 
 W e are asked to abandon the position that wo have taken up to this 
 day, as we did in Cuba, to give aid where people have been struggling 
 to be free, and we would be unable to extend our sympathies to people 
 all over the world who are struggling to be free, if we guarantee the 
 territorial integrity of existing nations. Under the proposed league 
 of nations we should have to guarantee the territorial integrity of the 
 Japanese Empire, the British Empire, the only two empires remain¬ 
 ing, and guarantee to them the possession of all the spoils and the 
 loot that they have gathered up in their existence in all parts of the 
 world. No relief could be given Ireland as in the sixteenth century 
 Spain gave aid to Ireland in her fight against England, for we 
 would be compelled to make a fight, and would be compelled to 
 send our men into Ireland, not for the purpose of helping them in 
 their struggle but in order to help England to rivet the chains upon 
 her. * 
 
 We point out that if France should desire to assist Ireland as 
 she did in the seventeenth century and the eighteenth century that 
 she would be unable to do so. 
 
 We say that it is utterly un-American, that it is against our best 
 interest, against our highest ideals and against our highest ambi¬ 
 tion, and we point out the facts so well known that if a league of 
 nations had been in existence at the time of the Revolution that 
 France could not have come to the asssitance of the 13 Colonies, or 
 if it had been in existence at the time of the Spanish-American War, 
 that we could not have gone to the assistance of Cuba, to help Cuba 
 to obtain the position that she now occupies among the Republics of 
 the world. 
 
 Now, so far as Ireland is concerned, of course we understand that 
 this discussion here should be very largely confined to the proposed 
 league of nations. But we want to point out some of the conditions 
 over there that show the state of affairs in the British Empire. We 
 say that no people on earth held in oppression, held practically in 
 slavery, have ever shown such an extraordinary political unanimity 
 in the expression of their desire to change the form of government 
 under which they live, and to become again one of the free nations 
 of the world. Ireland is able to support herself—to stand upon her 
 feet. England last year made from Ireland $225,000,000. She gath¬ 
 ered in taxation, according to her own figures, some £34,000,000, 
 equivalent to $170,000,000; she spent for the government of Ireland 
 some £13,000,000, leaving a profit of £21,000,000, or $105,000,000, tak¬ 
 ing $5 as the value of a pound. 
 
 Last year by reason of her absolute control of the sea, by reason of 
 the fact that she shut Ireland off absolutely from contact with the 
 rest of the world, so far as commerce is concerned, compelling Ireland 
 to sell everything she has to sell through an English channel and 
 compelling her to buy everything she has to buy from the western 
 
7G2 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 world through an English channel, she did 95 per cent of the 
 business of Ireland. 
 
 Sir Horace Plunkett says that Ireland’s business with the rest of 
 the world amounted to $820,000,000. The English statistics, so far 
 as we can get them, show that this amount was $S60,000,000 instead 
 of $820,000,000. And we say that the English trader, who has no 
 peer in ability, has made profit on the turnover of $120,000,000. This, 
 together with the excess taxation, makes a total of $225,000,000. 
 
 We say that since the Act of Union the Childers Commission, which 
 was appointed by Gladstone in 1894, composed of 15 men (9 English¬ 
 men), after two years of investigation of English data, reported that 
 Ireland, instead of costing the English money, from January, 1861 to 
 1896, had overpaid into the English treasury in the form of overtaxa¬ 
 tion annually the sum of £2,715,000, or the equivalent of $14,000,000, 
 which means that for the 120 years since the formation of the union 
 England had taken out of Ireland over $1,700,000,000. We call 
 your attention to that staggering sum even in these days. When 
 they wanted to destroy France they imposed an indemnity of 
 $1,000,000,000, but here they have taken from Ireland in overtaxation 
 a much greater sum. 
 
 In the last 70 years, between 1845 and 1915, the population of Ire¬ 
 land has been practically cut in two. In 1845 the population was 
 practically 8,500,000—between 8,250,000 and 8,500,000. According 
 to the census taken in 1915 by the British Government the popula¬ 
 tion was a little over 4,000,000. We say that you can not find any 
 parallel in the history of the world as that. 
 
 Senator Knox. From what years? 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Seventy years; from 1845 to 1915. 
 
 Senator Knox. There is a parallel in Central America. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. I did not know that you could find one. 
 
 Senator Knox. That is under very benighted conditions. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. I would say, in relation to that, by way of com¬ 
 parison, that the peoples of the continent of Europe that were most 
 strongly tyrannized over—if you put it in that way, the nations 
 against whose governments the strongest complaints were made by 
 those over whom they were working and who suffered most under 
 such a condition of affairs, during the time that Alsace-Lorraine 
 was under German rule she grew and prospered in population; 
 Schleswig-Holstein under German rule grew and prospered; Poland 
 under Kussian rule; and there has been no parallel, except as Senator 
 Knox has indicated as to Central America. 
 
 We say that we are dependent for four months of every year upon 
 the foreign markets of the world to find some place in which to sell 
 our goods in order that our factories may run to their full capacity 
 and the men may be employed. 
 
 In 1913 the business between England and the United States 
 amounted to $875,000,000. The exports from America to England 
 were $700,000,000, while the imports from England to America were 
 $175,000,000. The business between England and Ireland was $675,- 
 000,000 in that year, and the imports were around $350,000,000, so 
 that England found in Ireland a place to which to send her manu¬ 
 factured goods to the extent of twice that she found in this country. 
 
 In 1801 the population of England was 9,000,000 and the popula- 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 763 
 
 tion of Ireland was 6,000,000. The size of England is 50,000 square 
 miles and Ireland 32,000 square miles, showing that the proportion 
 of population of Ireland should be two-thirds that of England. 
 That was the condition when the act of union, passed on the 1st of 
 January, 1801, which Gladstone characterized as the most corrupt act 
 ever passed in England. 
 
 Wo say that the proposed league of nations is un-American and 
 that it can not be depended on to guard the interests of America, 
 that it can not safeguard the interest of America. We speak for 
 people who are devoted to America above everything else, who have 
 done everything possible to stand b}^ American traditions and ideals. 
 We urge upon you very strongly, speaking practically for one of 
 every five persons in America, that the Senate report against this 
 proposed league of nations and recommend that the Senate reject 
 it, and if under any circumstances any part of it should be accepted 
 that under no condition should article 10 or article 11 be accepted, 
 or any other things from which there would be a curtailment of 
 American sovereignty and American independence. We are opposed 
 to the whole league of nations. We believe it is un-American, and 
 urge and insist that in it there can be no justice and no just and per¬ 
 manent peace, and that by adopting it you are only making for a 
 continuance of the war. 
 
 Senator Moses. Judge Cohalan, you spoke of your speaking for one 
 of every five persons in the United States. Do you intend to imply 
 that there are 20,000,000 of inhabitants of this country who are of 
 Irish origin? 
 
 Judge Coiialan. We think there are many more than that. 
 
 Senator Moses. And the views that you express are shared by that 
 
 20,000,000? 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Suppose I give you some evidence of it. I would 
 like to put in the record the reasons I have for that opinion. On 
 the 22d and 23d of February, in the city of Philadelphia, I had the 
 honor of presiding over the most patriotic gathering of American 
 citizens that I have ever seen. There were 5,132 accredited dele¬ 
 gates to the convention. The resolutions that were passed were of¬ 
 fered by Cardinal Gibbons, seconded by a distinguished Episco¬ 
 palian minister and by a distinguished Presbyterian minister and 
 by a famous Jewish rabbi. 
 
 Among those thousands of delegates were hundreds representing 
 the Friends of Irish Freedom, hundreds representing the Ancient 
 Order of Hibernians, with its more than quarter million members, 
 and represented at this hearing by its national president, Judge 
 Deery of Indianapolis, and its other national officers. Many speak¬ 
 ers there represented the Women’s Auxiliary of the Ancient Order 
 of Hibernians, and that order is today represented here by its 
 national president, Mrs. McWhorter, and its other national officers; 
 and present also were representatives from practically every Irish 
 American society in this country. From compilations frequently 
 made from statistics as to the racial origin of the people of our 
 country, we feel that we are well within bounds in claiming that 
 without regard to religious belief, at least 1 in every 5 of our citizens 
 is of Irish origin. 
 
 Senator Moses. Can you explain, then, why it is that the Irish 
 Senators are so lukewarm ? 
 
764 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 J udge Cohalan. Senator, I came here for the purpose of making an 
 argument showing our position to-day. I came here to make an 
 argument that would appeal to all the Senators, no matter what 
 races they represent, and when the hearing is concluded I hope that 
 the Senators will be convinced. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. The difficulty is that you have 
 been addressing yourself thus far to members of this committee who 
 are of one mind upon this subject. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Looking around and seeing the number of them, 
 I am glad that that is so. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. I wish it were possible for you 
 to address them all. 
 
 The Chairman. Are you ready to go on? 
 
 Judge Cohalan. I am going to cjill upon Mr. Patrick J. Lynch, 
 of the Supreme Court of Indiana, to read the memorial on the behalf 
 of 5 those who have come here. They have come from practically every 
 State in the Union, from all walks in life, and from all over the 
 country. We wish that it were possible to get people from the differ¬ 
 ent parts of the country to be heard, but we have prepared a general 
 memorial, and then later we will hand in the names of those who have 
 signed. 
 
 (The following memorial was read by Mr. Patrick J. Lynch:) 
 
 MEMORIAL TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 Senators : We, citizens of tlie United States, of Irish blood, but attached 
 above all things to this Republic and its Constitution, respectfully pray that the 
 proposed treaty now before you he rejected as a direct violation of the prin¬ 
 ciples on which this war was fought, as they were defined by President Wilson 
 in these words, addressed to Congress: 
 
 “National aspirations must he respected; peoples may now he dominated and 
 governed only by their own consent. ‘ Self-determination ” is not a mere phrase. 
 It is an imperative principle of action, which statesmen will henceforth ignore 
 at their peril.” 
 
 And, again, in the President’s address delivered at Mount Vernon July 4, 
 1918: 
 
 “ The settlement of every question, whether of territory, of sovereignty, of 
 economic arrangement, or of political relationship, upon the basis of the free 
 acceptance of that settlement by the people immediately concerned, and not 
 upon the basis of the material interest or advantage of any other nation or 
 people which may desire a different settlement for the sake of its own exterior 
 influence or mastery.” 
 
 On these principles other nations which have claimed their right to inde¬ 
 pendence only during a period comparatively recent have been emancipated. 
 To them America was bound by no ties save that of sympathy for the cause of 
 freedom. 
 
 Ireland has been asserting continuously her claim to independence for eight 
 centuries. America is bound to her by close ties of friendship and of obligation 
 for manifold services in peace and war. One-fifth of this entire population is 
 of Irish extraction. In every war which America has fought Irishmen have 
 shed their blood in a measure far in excess of their proportion to population. 
 We ask that Ireland be not the only nation excluded from the benefit of the 
 glorious principles enunciated by Mr. Wilson, as those which the great war 
 was fought to establish. 
 
 We especially denounce Article X of the proposed league of nations as a de¬ 
 vice to stifle the conscience of civilization and render it impotent to condemn, 
 and, by condemning, to end the oppression of weak nations enslaved by power¬ 
 ful neighbors. It impeaches the most creditable page in our history and dis¬ 
 credits the circumstances and conditions in which our Republic was born and 
 our liberty achieved. 
 
 The conscience of civilization, the only force to which the oppressed can 
 appeal, would no longer be able to take effective jurisdiction of wrongs perpe- 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 765 
 
 trated by powerful nations on weaker people. No struggling nation has ever 
 achieved its independence except through the aid of other nations. The strug¬ 
 gling American Colonies could never have thrown off the yoke of Great Britain 
 without the aid of France. Cuba could never have been freed without the 
 intervention of this country, and one of the most creditable pages in human 
 history would never have been written. 
 
 Greece could never have escaped from the hideous domination of the Turk 
 but for tlie assistance of enlightened nations. 
 
 Under article 11 it becomes the right of the council of the league to prevent 
 an assembly of American citizens to petition their Government to afford relief to 
 an oppressed nation. On this point article 11 specifically says: 
 
 “ It is also declared to be the friendly right of each member of the league 
 to bring to the attention of the assembly or of the council any circumstance 
 whatever affecting international relations which threaten to disturb interna¬ 
 tional peace or the good understanding between nations on which peace de¬ 
 pends.” 
 
 Under that clause our Congress could not express in the future, as it did 
 In the past, our sympathy with countries like Greece, seeking freedom from 
 the Turk; the South American Republics, seeking liberty from Spain; or 
 tender a welcome to Kossuth, of stricken Hungary; or Parnell, pleading for 
 a self-governing Ireland. 
 
 The determination of Ireland to regain her independence has been one of 
 the sources of every great war which scourged the world for four centuries. 
 Any question which disturbs the peace of nations is uot domestic, but inter¬ 
 national. Its settlement is, therefore, an imperative necessity of international 
 peace. 
 
 Through long centuries of oppression Ireland has maintained her national 
 spirit largely because she has always hitherto been able to cherish a hope 
 that she might receive from some well-disposed foreign power the assistance 
 which would insure her independence. She looked to Spain for this aid at 
 the close of the sixteenth century; to France in the seventeenth, eighteenth, 
 and nineteenth centuries. She looks for it now in the twentieth century to 
 America, and we confidently hope and pray that the Senate will not allow that 
 light of hope to be extinguished. 
 
 Signed by— 
 
 Daniel F. Cohalan, justice, supreme court, New York City. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Khnsas City. 
 
 E. F. Dunne, former governor, Illinois, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Michael J. Ryan, Philadelphia. 
 
 John Archdeacon Murphy, member of American commission on Irish inde¬ 
 pendence, attending peace conference, Paris, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Charles S. Bartlett, governor, New Hampshire, Concord, N. H. 
 
 W. W. McDowell, lieutenant governor, Montana, Butte, Mont. 
 
 John W. Goff, former justice, supreme court, New York City. 
 
 Bourke Cochran, New York City. 
 
 Daniel T. O’Connell, director, Irish national bureau, Washington, Boston, 
 IvXnss 
 
 John E. Milholland, New York City. 
 
 James K. McGuire, representing Irish societies of Westchester County, N. Y. 
 
 Joseph F. O’Connell, former Member of Congress, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. F. X. McCabe, president De Paul University, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Right Rev. Monsignor Gerald P. Coglilan, treasurer Philadelphia Friends of 
 Irish Freedom, Philadelphia. 
 
 Michael Francis Doyle, Philadelphia. 
 
 Mary F. McWhorter, national president Ladies’ Auxiliary, Ancient Order of 
 Hibernians, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Peter F. Tague, Member of Congress, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Cornelius Corcoran John McBride branch, Friends of Irish Freedom, Law¬ 
 rence, Mass. 
 
 Frank S. McDonald, John McBride branch, Friends of Irish Freedom, Law¬ 
 rence, Mass. 
 
 Michael F. Phelan, Member of Congress, Lynn, Mass. 
 
 Hugh O’Neill, committee of 100 for an Irish republic, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Richard W. Wolfe, committee of 100 for an Irish republic, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 James E. Murray, representing Irish societies of Montana, Butte, Mont 
 
 C. E. McGuire, Washington, D. C. 
 
 D. J. Carlin, New Orleans, La. 
 
766 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 John P. Leahy, delegate, Friends of Irish Freedom, St. Louis, Mo. 
 W. J. O’Brien, M. D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Mrs. M. A. Gallagher, State president Ladies’ Auxiliary of Pennsylvania, 
 Ancient Order of Hibernians, Philadelphia. 
 
 Louis E. Kavanaugh, president Omaha Association branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom, Omaha, Nebr. 
 
 P. M. Halloran, representing Irish societies of Anaconda, Mont. 
 
 J. W. Maney, president of Friends of Irish Freedom, Oklahoma City, Okla. 
 Horace H. Hagan, former assistant attorney general of Oklahoma. 
 
 Dennis Meehan, York, Nebr. 
 
 Thomas Darragh Mullins, member national council, Friends of Irish Freedom, 
 Pittsburgh. 
 
 Dudley Field Malone, Croton on the Hudson, N. Y. 
 
 Martin Scully, former mayor of Waterbury, Waterbury, Conn. 
 
 Joseph P. Mahoney, president United Societies of Cook County and Chicago, 
 Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Rev. James Mattan Mythen, representing national council, Baltimore, Md. 
 Patrick Lee, secretary American commission on Irish independence, Rich¬ 
 mond Hill, N. Y. 
 
 Hon. David J. O’Connell, Representative, Congress, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Very Rev. Edward C. O’Reilly, representing Catholic clergy of diocese of La 
 Crosse, Baraboo, Wis. 
 
 P. J. McGarvey, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Hugh McCaffrey, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Bernard J. Rocks, Newcastle, Pa. 
 
 P. T. McCourt, committeeman, Friends of Irish Freedom, Akron, Ohio. 
 
 T. A. Clancy, Hartford delegate, Hartford, Conn. 
 
 Patrick J. Lynch, Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Margaret T. Mulvaney, State secretary Ladies’ Auxiliary Ancient Order of 
 Hibernians, Providence, R. I. 
 
 M. E. Smith, treasurer, St. Louis, Mo., St. Louis. 
 
 Robert Emmett O’Malley, delegate, Michael Davitt branch, Kansas City, Mo. 
 P. J. Ryan, member of executive council, Washington, D. C. 
 
 M. O’Neil, president, Friends of Irish Freedom, Akron, Ohio. 
 
 James A. Kelly, Danville, N. Y. 
 
 Katherine Hughes, secretary, Irish national bureau, Washington, D. C. 
 Joseph T. Brennan, secretary Federation of Catholic Societies, Boston, Mass. 
 John R. Ilaverty, director John McBride branch, Lawrence, Mass. 
 
 Timothy P. Donohue, treasurer, John McBride branch, Lawrence, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Walter P. Gough, director of Columbus, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Margaret L. Brosnahan, district president Ladies’ Auxiliary, Ancient Order of 
 Hibernians, Washington, D. C. 
 
 Margaret Buckley, district treasurer Ladies’ Auxiliary, Ancient Order of 
 Hibernians. 
 
 Thomas J. Blewett, representing Thomas Francis Magher branch, Bridge¬ 
 port, Conn. 
 
 H. B. Cassidy, Syracuse, N .Y. 
 
 Edward Ryan, president Friends of Irish Freedom, Syracuse branch Syra¬ 
 cuse, N. Y. 
 
 John B. London, secretary Ancient Order of Hibernians, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 E. J. Devine, delegate Norfolk branch, Norfolk, Ya. 
 
 James O’Neill, president John McBride branch, Lawrence, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Joseph Byrne, D. D., president St. Mary’s College, Darien, Conn. 
 Matthew Donovan, District Council 40, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 James O. Reilly, Ancient Order of Hibernian delegate, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Llenry J. Phillips, secretary Robert Emmet branch, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Patrick King, Young Men’s Union, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Joseph P. O’Neill, Federation of Irish County Societies, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 O’Neill Ryan, St. Louis, Mo., former justice supreme court. 
 
 Michael ILeffernan, Chester, Pa., Thomas Clarke branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 William J. Hurley, New York, N. Y., secretary Maj. John McBride branch, 
 Friends of Irish Freedom. 
 
 John J. Buckley, New York, N. Y., president Roger Casement branch, New 
 York City. 
 
 P. J. Ivilduff, Hoboken, N. J., State organizer. 
 
 Dr. T. C. McNamara, Hoboken, N. J., State organizer, Friends of Irish Free¬ 
 dom. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 767 
 
 Thomas O’Brien, New York, N. Y., president St. Columcille branch, Friends 
 of Irish Freedom. 
 
 Rev. William T. McLaughlin, Jersey City, N. J., State president, Friends of 
 Irish Freedom. 
 
 Michael J. O’Connor, New York, N. Y., Innisfail branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 Thomas J. Maloney, Jersey City, N. J., president P. Lorillard Co. 
 
 Kate M. Kelly, New York, N. Y., Irish Women’s Council. 
 
 John Regan, New Bedford, Mass., president Thmas Clarke branch. 
 
 Rodger Power O’Neill, M. D., New York City, N. Y., National committee. 
 
 Thomas McNamara, jr., Youngstown, Ohio, chairman Ohio committee. 
 
 Shaemas O’Sheel, New York, N. Y., William Pearse branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom and William Rooney Society. 
 
 Thomas F. J. Connolly, Port Chester, N. Y., Friends of Irish Freedom, Port 
 Chester and Rye, N. Y. 
 
 Roderick J. Kennedy, New York City, N. Y., confidential attendant Supreme 
 Court, State of New York. 
 
 W. E. Hogan, Bridgeport, Conn., vice president of De Valera branch, Bridge¬ 
 port, Conn. 
 
 John O’Dea, Philadelphia, Pa., national secretary Ancient Order of Hi¬ 
 bernians. 
 
 John J. O’Neill, Bridgeport, Conn., president T. F. Meagher branch, Friends 
 of Irish Freedom. 
 
 Attorney Thomas D. Shea, Nanticoke, Pa., local council, Luzerne County; 
 headquarters, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Secretary, Matthew O’Connor Ford; vice 
 president, T. R. Callam; treasurer, R. R. Fitzpatrick; trustees, P. J. Calligan, 
 J. V. Moylan, C. A. Judge, M. D. 
 
 John Stratton O’Leary, New York, N. Y., member of grievance committee, 
 Bronx Builders’ Protective Association. 
 
 Cornelius F. Murphy, Shelton, Conn., president of P. LI. Pearse branch. 
 Friends of Irish Freedom. 
 
 Rodger Power O’Neill, M. D., New York City, N. Y., member national com¬ 
 mittee. 
 
 James D. O’Neil, Jenkintown, Pa., organizer. 
 
 Thomas McCourt, New York, N. Y., Con Colbert branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom, Sunburst Club. 
 
 Frank Plague, Jersey City, N. J., member Jersey City branch. 
 
 Charles F. H. O’Brien, Jersey City, N. J., member Jersey City branch. 
 
 Eugene F. Kincaid, Jersey City, N. J., former Member of Congress. 
 
 Thomas Shea, Nanticoke, Pa. 
 
 Michael J. Enright, Chester, Pa., Thomas Clarke branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 James B. Mulherin, Augusta, Ga., delegate John F. Armstrong branch. 
 Friends of Irish Freedom, Augusta, Ga. 
 
 Margaret Bowles, New York City, N. Y., Bishop D. Dwyer branch, Friends 
 of Irish Freedom. 
 
 Peter J. Fleming, M. D., Boston, Mass., medical committee. 
 
 Daniel Foley, Winthrop, Mass., professor of economics, Trade Union Col¬ 
 lege, Boston, Mass. 
 
 John Morton, Dorchester, Mass., advisory committee chairman, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Edward S. Brock, S. J., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Joseph J. Hall, Naugatuck, Conn., assistant purchasing agent of Rubber Re¬ 
 generating Co. 
 
 James O’Sullivan, Lowell, Mass., treasurer of two important corporations. 
 
 Jeremiah Flahavan, Ansonia, Conn., president of James Connelly Club, 
 Friends of Irish Freedom, Ansonia. 
 
 Francis B. McKinney, Boston, Mass., lecturer Joseph Plunkett branch. 
 Friends of Irish Freedom. 
 
 John G. Fitzgerald, Ansonia, Conn., vice president. 
 
 Michael B. McGreal, New Plaven, Conn., City Board Ancient Order of Hi¬ 
 bernians, New Haven, five divisions, three auxiliaries; Division No. 7, Ancient 
 Order of Hibernians; Sarsfield G. A. Club, Friends of Irish Freedom, New 
 Haven, Conn. 
 
 Matthew Cummings, Boston, Mass., president Boston Council, Friends of 
 Irish Freedom. 
 
 John H. H. McNamee, Boston, Mass., banker and manufacturer. 
 
 Hon. Edward W. Quinn, Cambridge, Mass., mayor of Cambridge. 
 
768 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 Richard Dwyer, national vice president Ancient Order of Hibernians, South 
 Boston, Mass. 
 
 Paul P. Spain, Cambridge, Mass., treasurer bench and bar committee, 
 Boston, Mass. 
 
 James A. Dorsey, Boston, Mass., chairman finance committee, bench and bar 
 committee, Boston. 
 
 Michael L. Fahey, Boston, Mass., secretary committee bench and bar. 
 
 Daniel H. Coakley, Boston, Mass., chairman committee bench and bar. 
 
 Joseph C. Pelletin, Boston, Mass., bench and bar committee. 
 
 Edw. F. McSweeney, Framingham, Mass., member national council, member 
 advisory committee, Boston. 
 
 John J. McDonagh, New York, N. Y., delegate from the Archbishop Plunkett 
 branch, Friends of Irish Freedom. 
 
 H. Miller, New York, N. Y., Archbishop Plunkett branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 James E. Deery, Indianapolis, Ind., national president Ancient Order of 
 Hibernians. 
 
 E. F. White, Chester, Pa. 
 
 Rossa F. Downing, Washington, D.. C., Washington branch, Friends of 
 Irish Freedom. 
 
 Wm. J. Boyle, Central Labor Union of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 N. J. Sinnott, Member of Congress from Oregon. 
 
 Daniel J. Moran, Lynn, Mass., recording secretary and director of publicity. 
 
 'Mrs.) Honor Walsh, Germantown, Pa., editorial staff, the Standard and 
 Guild. 
 
 Robert E. Ford, New York, N. Y., editor Irish World. 
 
 Patrick King, Catholic Young Men’s Union, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Patrick Fitzgerald, United Irish Societies of Western Pennsylvania. 
 
 Patrick Cronin, Duquesne University. 
 
 Thomas Lee, New York, N. Y. 
 
 William J. Noonan, 37 Raleigh Avenue, Richmond borough. City of New York. 
 
 Thomas Rock, Central Federated Union, New York City. 
 
 Louis D. Ivavanagh, president of Irish Self-Determination Club, Omaha. 
 
 James O. Reilly, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Joseph McGarrity, Philadelphia, Pa., chairman Irish Volunteer Committee. 
 
 John J. Liddy, Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 William H. Foley, Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 P. J. Conway, president Irish-American Athletic Club, New York City. 
 
 John H. Dooley, 535 W r est One hundred and twenty-first Street, New York, 
 N. Y.; representative position, National Executive Committee, New York City. 
 
 Annie Lester Lyons, delegate Yorktown branch, F. O. I. F., Norfolk, Va. 
 
 Lawrence Craddock Lawless, delegate Yorktown branch F. O. I. F., Norfolk, 
 Va. 
 
 Margaret Elward Lawless, delegate Yorktown branch F. O. I. F., Norfolk, Va. 
 
 James C. Gordon, president Yorktown branch F. O. I. F., Norfolk, Va. 
 
 M. J. Lyons, vice president Yorktown branch F. O. I. F., United States deputy 
 marshal’s office, Norfolk, Va. 
 
 Henry McNally, president of Patrick Henry branch, Friends of Irish Freedom, 
 Girard, Ohio. 
 
 Thomas F. Martin, secretary of state of New Jersey. 
 
 John Mannix, Glens Falls, N. Y. 
 
 Patrick O’Hagerty, Springfield, Mass. 
 
 Patrick J. Kennedy, Glens Falls, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Joseph O’Keefe, Akron, Ohio. 
 
 J. B. Shannon, Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Casinn J. Welch, Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Martin Owens, Newark, N. J. 
 
 Rev. Thomas J. Hurton, Philadelphia, Pa., St. Enda’s Gaelic School and 
 St. Edna branch of the Gaelic League. 
 
 H. J. Phillips, Philadelphia, Pa., Robert Emmet branch, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 J. T. Lawler* Norfolk, Va., member national committee, Friends of Irish 
 Freedom. 
 
 Hugh Montague, Passaic, N. J., general contractor. 
 
 Roderick J. Kennedy, clerk Supreme Court State of New York. 
 
 D. J. Lawless, Marcellus Falls, N. Y. 
 
 R. E. O’Malley, Michael Davitt branch, Friends of Irish Freedom, Kansas 
 City. Mo. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 7G9 
 
 J. D. Turner, Baltimore, Md. 
 
 W. C. Walsh, Cumberland, Mi 
 
 Joseph B. Fitzgerald, member Wolfe Tone Club, Jersey City, N. J. 
 
 Jerome O'Keeffe, Jersey City, N. J. 
 
 John G. McTigue, New York, N. Y. 
 
 It. T. B. Kelly, Gardner, Mass. 
 
 James Tumulty, 646 Bergen Avenue, Jersey City, N. J., president of Wolfe 
 Tone Club, Jersey City, N. J. 
 
 P. J. O’Donnell, Detroit, Midi. 
 
 D. Lynch, Utica, N. Y. 
 
 Miss Margaret Bowers, New York, N. Y. 
 
 John B. Burke, Gary, Ind. 
 
 William J. Maloney, Gary, Ind. 
 
 M. C. Ford, Oklahoma City, Okla. 
 
 Senator Rrandegee. Mr. Chairman, I suggest the absence of a 
 quorum. I would like the record to state the names of those present. 
 
 The Chairman. The clerk will call the roll. 
 
 The clerk called the roll and the following members answered to 
 their names: Senators Lodge, Eorah, Branaegee, Fall, Knox, Hard¬ 
 ing, Johnson, New, Moses, Swanson, and Pittman. 
 
 The Chairman. There are 12 Senators present, a quorum. Judge 
 Cohalan, you may put on your next speaker. 
 
 Senator Borah. Before that is done, Mr. Chairman, I want to 
 make a suggestion with reference to the gentlemen who are still to 
 address the committee. The argument has been made by the ad¬ 
 vocates of the league and by some of our colleagues that under the 
 league of nations Ireland would have a better opportunity or a better 
 chance of having her affairs settled in harmony with her aspira¬ 
 tions than without it. You gentlemen having kept close tab, un¬ 
 doubtedly, upon the debate along that line of argument, will ap¬ 
 preciate what I say. I would like to have some one address his at¬ 
 tention to that feature of the question. 
 
 Judge ConALAN. That will be done during the course of the hear¬ 
 ing. Mr. Chairman, I want to put in the record a memorial, with 
 certain figures. 
 
 The Chairman. The } 7 will be printed, and as our time is limited, 
 we will not take the time to read them now. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Very well. Mr. Chairman, I am also going to 
 file Ireland’s declaration of independence along with other ofacial 
 documents, and some extension of my remarks. 
 
 (The extension of Judge Cohalan’s remarks and the declaration 
 of independence referred to are here printed in full, as follows:) 
 
 The great trouble with the mass of the people of America on the question of 
 Ireland Is their viewpoint on the Irish question. Without intending to be 
 unfair, they take for granted the justice of the English view. They find Eng¬ 
 land, largely the mistress of the world and in many ways admitted to be the 
 leader of modern civilization, in possession of Ireland. 
 
 They find, according to histories mainly written by England’s friends, that 
 she has been thus in Ireland for centuries, and they take it for granted that she 
 must be there legally; that she is there as a matter of right. They take for 
 granted, too, that in the evolution of civilization, in the making of.history, that 
 conditions required her to be there, and that England’s claim to the overlord- 
 ship in Ireland is a valid and just claim. 
 
 This view is strengthened by all the literature which most Americans ever 
 read. The so-called English literature with which Americans come in contact 
 usually rates England as the one great power which, through the centuries 
 past, has been carrying aloft the torch of justice and progress into the dark 
 corners of the world. So, it is not to be wondered at that many Americans are 
 prone to think of England as the guiding star of civilization, educating and 
 
770 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 lifting up downtrodden, suffering people that have been tyrannized over by their 
 national tyrants. 
 
 This is the view of England that Englishmen like to have the world take 
 of their country. Because of this viewpoint, it is extremely difficult to get 
 before the American jury—fair as it intends to be—the actual facts of history, 
 not to speak of the present-day conditions as they exist in Ireland. 
 
 THE DOMINATING FIGURES IN ENGLAND. 
 
 The ordinary American, accustomed to giving almost all of his time to a 
 study of the internal conditions of his own country, so far as his interests 
 leads him on, has not learned to differentiate between the England which is 
 and the England that, according to her writers and poets, seems to be. 
 
 He has not come to understand that the English democracy of which he 
 hears and reads so much has little reality in fact, and that England still con¬ 
 tinues to be governed by a handful of men, representing, with but few excep¬ 
 tions, the same small group of titled land-controlling families that have gov¬ 
 erned England since the days of Henry XIII, if not, in fact, much longer. Since 
 the downfall of continental aristocracies this is true of England more than of 
 any other country. 
 
 The dominating figures in England to-day—those in actual power—are the 
 Cecils and their relations. Lloyd-George or some other figure that has come to 
 represent democracy or radicalism, if you will, in the eyes of the w r orld, is put 
 forward as the premier of governing authority. But the will that dominates, 
 controls, and finally directs the policies and actions of England is that of the 
 master spirit Cecil, no matter which member of that family or its connections 
 it may happen to be. 
 
 In the last generation it was the Marquis of Salisbury, former premier 
 of England, the man who said, some forty years ago, that England and America 
 were natural rivals in every court and in every port; the man who more than 
 any other—with the exception of Joseph Chamberlain, the great radical who 
 ratted and joined the forces of conservation—was responsible for the destruc¬ 
 tion of the two little Republics in South Africa. 
 
 It was this same Salisbury who said, in the days when the Irish were car¬ 
 rying everything before them in the Parliamentary fights in the House of Com¬ 
 mons, that the Irish were no better than the Hottentots and should receive the 
 same treatment. It was the same man who represented England in the Con¬ 
 gress of Berlin and of whom Bismarck said—because he quit when opposed 
 by superior force—that he reminded him of a lath, painted to look like iron. 
 
 Salisbury was aided and was succeeded by his nephew, Arthur James Bal¬ 
 four, who became Premier of England, first Lord of the Admiralty, and a num¬ 
 ber of other high-sounding things, but who has never been able to wipe out the 
 title of “ Bloody Balfour ” conferred upon him by the people of Ireland when he 
 was chief secretary for Ireland, and, among other things, ordered the shoot¬ 
 ing, if necessary, by the troops, in cold blood, of the defenseless, unarmed people 
 of Mitchelstown. 
 
 Balfour is still to the fore and is probably the chief governing force In Eng¬ 
 land to-day, except in so far as he is displaced by his cousin, Lord Robert Cecil, 
 son of the Marquis of Salisbury and father of the proposed League of Nations— 
 which w T ould, if it became effective, undo the w r ork of the revolution and put 
 us in the position of again being a vassal state of England, subject to the con¬ 
 trol of the Cecils or any other landed aristocracy that might, in the future, con¬ 
 trol the destines of England and the world. 
 
 These are types of the men who dominate England, and, through her, con¬ 
 trol the British Empire. The little King George V, first cousin to the late 
 Emperor of the Germans and the Czar of the Russians, at present represents the 
 German royal family as King of England and Emperor of India. 
 
 He rules over every third person on earth and over almost every third square 
 mile of land on earth. He is actually master of all the seas and is at the head 
 of a government more powerful than any which ever before existed in all the 
 history of mankind. 
 
 Englishmen like to say that King George reigns but does not rule. That is 
 true. The real ruling force is that handful of aristocrats who represent the 
 landed feudal aristocracy of England and who form the most absolute, most 
 arbitrary and most powerful autocracy the world has ever seen. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 771 
 
 ENGLAND MAKES OTHER NATIONS SUPPLY THE SOLDIERS. 
 
 The history of England differs from that of every other country. No other 
 country before her has reached her dominant place among the empires of the 
 earth. Home approached nearer to England than did any other country in 
 similarity of methods by which she acquired world control. Her imperial 
 motto, “ Divide et Impera,” marked the policy by which she subdued almost 
 the entire world of her day and ruled the known world without a rival for 
 centuries. 
 
 But Rome acquired most of her power through her own soldiers. The gen¬ 
 erals who led her armies to victory were of Roman blood; the soldiers who 
 swept everything before them on the Held of battle were Roman legions, who 
 found few who could stand before them. They risked their own lives, their own 
 blood, for the quarrels of their country, in order that her will might be imposed 
 upon other countries. 
 
 England has improved on all this. She follows the Roman motto, but be¬ 
 cause England leaves the control of the policy of her government in the hands 
 of her diplomats, other nations, other races, are made to supply the generals 
 who win the battles, and the soldiers who bleed, in order that England may 
 grow great. 
 
 ENGLAND’S POLICY TAKES ADVANTAGE OF FRIEND AND FOE. 
 
 The policy which had its beginning under Henry the Eighth has been con¬ 
 sistently carried forward, subordinating every other interest to that of the 
 growth of England and the extension of her power. It has been carried on 
 through all the ages by every government which comes into power in England, 
 no matter what its domestic policy may have been. 
 
 Englishmen may differ upon domestic problems—upon questions of taxation, 
 of education, of religion—but as against all foreigners they are a unit and their 
 policy is always consistently to take advantage of all openings given them 
 throughout the world, to make and unmake alliances, to make and break 
 treaties, to take advantage of friend and foe in order to add to the wealth 
 and power of England and to break down those who have stood against her. 
 
 One of the results of this policy is seen to-day in the proud boast of England 
 that the sun never sets on the British Empire. Her flag flies in triumph over 
 territory in every continent and in most of the important islands of the seas. 
 It is carried aloft as the flag controlling the power of every sea of the world. 
 
 Her forts guard practically all the great narrow waterways of the earth, 
 with the exception of the Panama Canal. Yet here, by reason of her extraordi¬ 
 nary influence over American legislation, England has acquired for her com¬ 
 merce all the rights and privileges enjoyed by American commerce, although 
 the Panama Canal belongs to us, was built by America and paid for by Amer¬ 
 ica’s treasures. 
 
 MOLDING PUBLIC OPINION OF THE WORLD. 
 
 Another and, if possible, more important result of this policy of England is 
 the extraordinary control she has gained over public opinion in every country 
 in the world. Her soldiers have won battles for her on land, her admirals 
 have won fights at sea, but these are as nothing when compared to the triumph 
 of her diplomats. No group of men in the history of the world can compare in 
 skill, in adroitness, in finesse, in influence, with the diplomats of England. 
 
 The visible British Empire is an external monument of their triumph, but the 
 invisible British Empire, with its control of influences in every government 
 on earth, its thousand and one ways of making opinion through the press, 
 the magaznes, the pulpits, the schools, of every race and in every clime, is a 
 vaster, more far-reaching monument of their finesse, their adroitness, their 
 ability to make black seem white. 
 
 The Romans were satisfied with their triumph at arms. When their soldiers 
 had beaten down those of the opponent, the generals and princes of the van¬ 
 quished were brought to Rome and made to walk sub jugo through the streets, 
 chained to the wheels of the chariot of the Roman Consul. 
 
 The English diplomat, more skilled in human nature, more subtle, more far- 
 reaching in his plans, is not satisfied with such outward marks of triumph. 
 He carries on a campaign throughout the world, to justify his actions, and, 
 if possible, to ease his own conscience. As an example: 
 
 135549°—19-2 
 
772 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 ENGLAND ATTEMPTS TO DESTROY THE SOUL OF IRELAND. 
 
 Even though England by brute force has been In possession of the body of 
 Ireland for centuries, the English diplomat continues his fight to destroy the 
 soul of Ireland. Even though he has proclaimed, at the birth of each succeed¬ 
 ing generation, that he has again conquered Ireland, he still keeps looking in 
 vain for a declaration from the people of Ireland that they have been conquered. 
 
 He tells himself that he has beaten the Irish because of the thousand and 
 one cruelties he has practiced upon them, but he knows in his heart that he 
 can not conquer the Irish people while one man and one woman of Irish blood 
 survive. 
 
 He knows—if the world floes not know—that the people of Ireland want 
 absolute independence. He has been able with a thousand subterfuges to con¬ 
 fuse the thought of the world on the question of what Ireland wants, but he 
 can not deceive himself. 
 
 The Balfours and Cecils of this generation know, as well as Burleigh, their 
 relative, in the days of the reign of Elizabeth knew, that what Ireland wants 
 Is to have England get out of Ireland, bag and baggage, and leave the people 
 of Ireland to govern their own country in their own way. 
 
 IRELAND IS UNITED FOR ABSOLUTE INDEPENDENCE. 
 
 In the last analysis, the question between England and Ireland is simplicity 
 itself. There are two nations, each of which wishes to rale, govern, own Ire¬ 
 land. One Is the Irish nation, to whom Ireland belongs, for whom it was set 
 apart by God Almighty Himself from all the rest of the world. 
 
 The Irish people have dwelt in Ireland for thousands of years, distinct and 
 separate in a hundred ways from ail other peoples, set apart in nature, in 
 thought, in language, in custom from the rest of the world, marked by the hand 
 of God with an individuality all their own. 
 
 The Irish people have their own strength, their own virtues, their own gifts, 
 their own weaknesses, but differ from and are different to any and all other 
 races of men. The Irish people have absorbed all other strains of blood that 
 have gone into the strange country of Ireland so as to have made strangers 
 who have gone there, after a few generations, an integral part of themselves, 
 or, as an old writer phrased it, “ more Irish than the Irish themselves.” 
 
 The other nation that wishes to own, govern, and rule Ireland is the English 
 nation, belonging to England but foreign to Ireland. A nation of great gifts, 
 great failings; a nation that may yet, in the providence of God, reach the point 
 where it can be made to see that it will be greater to conquer themselves than 
 to conquer a city or a world; greater to bring peace, contentment, and oppor¬ 
 tunity for decent living, not to some portion of itself but to all its people, so 
 that it may not be said in the future, as it was said in the past, in a recent 
 report of n British commission, that one-third of the people of England did 
 not have a week between themselves and starvation. 
 
 IRELAND ONLY WANTS WHAT BELONGS TO HER. 
 
 If the question between Ireland and England were between two individuals, 
 no jury sitting in any part of America would have any difficulty in disposing 
 of the matter. Ireland does not ask anything of England except to be let alone. 
 She wants only what belongs to her. She wants only that which was her own. 
 She wants to govern herself and her own people in her own way, according to 
 her own standards, and with absolute religious freedom and political equality 
 for all of her children. 
 
 Ireland does not ask one Inch of territory that Is not contained within 
 the four seas of Ireland. She does not ask to impose her will upon a single 
 person who dwells beyond her shores. She appeals to the free people of the 
 earth for the opportunity to go her own way, in peace and harmony with all 
 the rest of mankind. She offers not alone to forgive, but so far as she can, 
 even to forget past dealings with England and to dwell in peace and amity and 
 concord with England as a neighbor. 
 
 But she refuses, as she has refused for 750 years, to permit the stranger— 
 England—to govern her, to control her resources, to shut her off from contact 
 with the other nations of the earth, to keep her out of her high place among the 
 nations. She says, with the voice of a united people—not in a quarrelsome 
 way, but in the quiet voice of reasoned judgment—that as she has fought for 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 773 
 
 750 years for her Independence, so she is prepared to fight, if necessary, as 
 long again In order to attain that independence, and to resume her place among 
 the independent nations. 
 
 Her sons say for her, quite calmly, with knowledge of the fact that though 
 scattered all over the world, they yet remain a great race, that England with all 
 her power, with all her subtlety, with all her barbarity, can not destroy them 
 or wipe them out. That the fight which England waged through so many cen¬ 
 turies can only end when England shall withdraw her last soldier from Ireland 
 and leave that country, which she has been robbing for centuries, to govern and 
 rule herself. 
 
 The diplomat of England has succeeded in many parts of the world as has no 
 other diplomat in the history of mankind, but he has failed in Ireland as 
 absolutely and completely as any diplomat has failed in other parts of the 
 world. 
 
 It may be said without exaggeration that England has tried for centuries 
 every form of tyranny, of cruelty, of inhumanity in her treatment of the people 
 of Ireland. Her chief spokesman, Lloyd-George, admitted in the House of 
 Commons last year that England had made an absolute failure of her govern¬ 
 ment of Ireland, and that to-day she was as unpopular with the mass of the 
 people of Ireland as she was in the days of Oliver Cromwell. 
 
 BELGIAN ATROCITIES DUPLICATED A HUNDRED-FOLD IN IRELAND. 
 
 0 
 
 In the early stages of the late Great War, the world was made familiar 
 with the story of the treatment the Belgians received in their own country at the 
 hands of the invaders. It was but the recital and summary of England’s treat¬ 
 ment of Ireland. Not an atrocity was charged against the Germans in Belgium, 
 not a cruelty was practiced, not a crime committed, which could not be dupli¬ 
 cated one hundred-fold in England’s treatment of Ireland. 
 
 Proof of this fact need only be taken from the admissions of English his¬ 
 torians; from the declarations of English statesmen—the only difference be¬ 
 tween Belgium and Ireland being that the atrocities in Belgium extended over 
 a period of three or four years, while the atrocities of England in Ireland 
 have extended over the centuries. 
 
 Belgium to-day, with a chorus of thanksgiving from all.over the world, has 
 resumed her place among the free nations of the earth and is to be indemnified 
 in so far as money can indemnify a suffering country for losses sustained. 
 
 Ireland to-day, after seven and a half centuries of greater suffering still lies 
 prostrate at the feet of England, while English statesmen, with a smug hypocrisy 
 all their own, dilate with well-stimulated astonishment on the dreadful fact 
 that England can not leave Ireland to be governed by Irishmen, because, for¬ 
 sooth, the Irish can not agree politically among themselves. 
 
 NO SUCH POLITICAL UNANIMITY EXISTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD. 
 
 The fact is, however, that there is in Ireland to-day a degree of political 
 unanimity greater than exists in'any other country on earth—very much 
 greater than that which exists in England, where Lloyd-George and his con¬ 
 freres are kept in power through a political coalition between eight different 
 groups, and much greater than exists In our own country. 
 
 Ireland is the only country in the world in which a plebiscite has been taken 
 since the armistice was declared last November. The result of that plebiscite 
 was that the people of Ireland, by a vote of more than three to one, declared in 
 favor of absolute separation from England and in favor of the establishment of 
 an Irish republic. 
 
 This was on the 14th of last December. On the 21st day of January of this 
 year the elected representatives of the people of Ireland met in convention at 
 the Mansion House in the city of Dublin, declared the existence of the Irish 
 republic, and made an appeal to the free peoples of the earth for its interna¬ 
 tional recognition. 
 
 In furtherance of that appeal, Eamon de Valera, president of the Irish repub¬ 
 lic, and several members of the Dail Eireann (Irish congress) are now in this 
 country. They seek to lay before the people of America actual conditions as 
 they exist in Ireland to-day. They ask a hearing in order that America may 
 understand that what the people of Ireland are asking is full recognition of 
 their status as a free and independent people. 
 
774 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 They seek not some redress of grievances, large or small, but they demand 
 that England take her grip off Ireland and leave the country to be governed by 
 its own people in its own way. The opinion of America has been aroused within 
 the last year as it never has been before in favor of Ireland. 
 
 ENGLAND AIMS TO CONFUSE THE ISSUE. 
 
 But the English diplomats with their accustomed skill are seeking to confuse 
 the issue, to prevent our people from getting a clear understanding of what is 
 at stake between Ireland and England. 
 
 It is their task, their duty at this time, not to simplify but to complicate 
 the issue; not to clarify, but to confuse the situation. Because of that, there 
 appear in a hundred forms, a hundred suggestions from England as to a way 
 . out of the difficulty. 
 
 One group talks of Dominion home rule, while others talk of a dozen varie¬ 
 ties of the same form. Carson talks of having conditions reihain as they are, 
 while Smuts—the “ slim ” South African who believes all peoples should con¬ 
 tinue to be swallowed up by the British Empire—comes forward with that 
 latest suggestion that Ireland should receive the same recognition as that given 
 to Bohemia. 
 
 But all ask for Ireland something which England wants—none offers to Ire¬ 
 land that which Ireland demands; because at bottom—let them explain as 
 they may—in any one of the hundred devious devices English statesmen and 
 historians have used in attempting to explain it—the fact is that England re¬ 
 mains in Ireland for England’s profit, security, and power, and does not intend 
 to get out of Ireland until she is persuaded, either by force or by the prospect 
 of greater profit in some other form, that it is to her interest to do so. 
 
 England says she remains in Ireland only for two reasons: First, because 
 Irishmen can not agree politically, and, second, because Ireland can not finan¬ 
 cially stand alone. Neither statement has the slightest foundtion in fact. 
 
 PLEBISCITE TAKEN IN DECEMBER EEFUTES FIRST CLAIM. 
 
 The plebiscite taken in Ireland last December, under the most adverse con¬ 
 ditions, shows that the people of Ireland have reached a degree of political 
 unanimity practically without parallel. With the great English army of occu¬ 
 pation and with all the machinery of the Government in possession of the Eng¬ 
 lish garrison, the people of Ireland, by a vote of more than 3 to 1, decided in 
 favor of total separation of Ireland from England. 
 
 According to the standard American histories, Yffishington and his associates 
 w r ere never able to rally to their support more than a majority of the colonists, 
 if, in truth, they ever had so large a proportion of the colonists on their side. 
 
 Even in the so-called convention presided over by Sir Horace Plunkett 
 and hand picked by Lloyd George, there was a majority of 40 to 29 in favor 
 of the proposed plan then given, which w r ould have gone beyond the scheme 
 of so-called settlement now proposed by many responsible spokesmen for Eng¬ 
 land. This is the more remarkable when it is considered that a large number 
 of the members of that body w^ere selected by Lloyd George and his associates 
 for the express purpose of having them fail to agree to any settlement. 
 
 If the situation w^ere not one of so much importance it v-ould be farcical to 
 hear Lloyd George talk about the failure of the Irish to agree, when he himself 
 remains in power in England, through a coalition made up of eight different 
 groups, and was the direct cause of the so-called failure to which he refers. 
 
 ENGLAND REMAINS IN IRELAND FOR HER OWN FINANCIAL GAIN. 
 
 England dares not to say that she remains in Ireland, because Ireland can 
 not financially stand alone. This, in spite of the fact that last year England 
 made at least $225,000,000 from' her control of Ireland. She collected from 
 Ireland and on Irish goods, during the preceding year a revenue of more 
 than 34,000,000 pounds. She spent on what she is pleased to call the 
 “ government ” of Ireland, about 13,000,000 pounds, leaving a profit to herself 
 of 21,000,000 pounds, an equivalent of about $105,000,000 profit gathered to 
 herself through taxation of Ireland. 
 
 Ireland did with the rest of the v r orld the previous year a business of 
 $820,000,000, according to Sir Horance Plunkett, though other spokesmen for 
 England say this estimate is entirely too low. Of the foreign business done 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 775 
 
 by Ireland, more than 95 per cent was done with England. Why? Because 
 England lias s^ completely cut Ireland off from the rest of the world that she 
 is unable to send goods abroad except through England, or to buy abroad ex¬ 
 cept through England, thus being compelled, against all economic law, to sell 
 in the cheapest market and to buy in the dearest market. 
 
 It is only fair to presume, as a result of this, that the English tradesman, 
 who is as shrewd, as adroit, as far seeing in his own field as is the English 
 diplomat in the field of Government, made a profit of at least 15 per cent on 
 the turn over of this business with Ireland. 
 
 Ireland thus gives to England, in addition to the taxation, the profit of 
 $120,000,000, thus making for England in a single year a profit of vast pro¬ 
 portions—a profit of $225,000,000 from her control of Ireland. That sum rep¬ 
 resents 225,000.000 reasons why England wishes to remain in Ireland. She 
 is there as a matter of profit. She is there as a matter of interest. But 
 above all other reasons, strong and selfish as they are, England remains in 
 Ireland because she regards her continued control of Ireland as vital and 
 essential to her continued control of the seas. 
 
 ENGLAND USES IRELAND FOB A GREAT DAIRY FARM. 
 
 Much has been made by the spokesmen of England of the claim that Ireland 
 must remain attached to England because England is the chief market for 
 Irish goods, and the country through which Ireland’s commerce with the world 
 must be carried on, if Ireland is to seek a world market. 
 
 No more damning indictment could be brought against England than is 
 brought by this bit of English propaganda. The simple outstanding fact is 
 that England does not buy one dollar’s worth of goods from Ireland which sha 
 coifid buy cheaper in any other part of the world. Further, because of her 
 absolute control of the seas of the world, and of her economic contact 
 with every other country on earth, England does not sell to Ireland one single 
 article, no matter how insignificant, for which she could find a better price in 
 any other part of the globe. 
 
 England uses Ireland for a great dairy farm, a broad grazing land, in order 
 that food may be provided at the lowest possible price, for the teeming millions 
 in the industrial centers of England. She uses Ireland as a dumping ground 
 for the excess products of her factories—excess products which are turned out 
 by her manufacturers either to meet special competition in some other country 
 or in order to keep her industrial workers employed so that they may not have 
 time to think too much about the grievances and the industrial problems that 
 lead to revolution. 
 
 ENGLAND DESTROYED THE POPULATION OF IRELAND. 
 
 The world recently rang with English propaganda in the form of stories of 
 the tyrannies of the Czar of the Russias and of the government of the Cen¬ 
 tral Empires. These empires have gone, and properly gone, the ways of every 
 other tyrant of past history, but the fact remains that at their worst these 
 powers did not keep the population of Alsace-Lorraine, of Schleswig-Holstein, 
 of Galicia, from greatly increasing in numbers and in prosperity. 
 
 Nor did the brutalities and outrageous excesses of power of the successive 
 Czars of the Russias prevent Russian Poland from growing greatly in popula¬ 
 tion and in wealth. Yet in the 70 years from 1845 to 1915, the population of 
 Ireland, under what English spokesmen are pleased to call the benign reigns 
 of Victoria, of Edward VII, and of George V, has decreased from more than 
 eight and three-quarter millions to 4,390,219. 
 
 GOVERNMENT-MADE FAMINES TO DESTROY THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND. 
 
 In that time, in spite of the cruelties and misgovernment practiced upon the 
 people of those continental countries, no charge has been made and has been 
 proved—as in the case of Ireland—of a government-made famine in which more 
 than one million starved to death in a land of plenty, and another two million 
 were sent across the seas to seek in foreign countries an opportunity to live, an 
 opportunity of which they were deprived in their own land by reason of the 
 inhumanity of an alien government. 
 
 England has systematically broken down every effort made to build up the 
 industries, to develop the resources of Ireland, while her spokesmen sing in 
 chorus that all the wrongs of Ireland are ancient wrongs and that Ireland 
 is to-day governed by the same laws that govern England, and therefore the 
 Irish people should be contented with their lot and cease to cry for liberty. 
 
776 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 These assertions do not bear the slightest investigation of an impartial 
 mind. Ireland has been turned into a grazing country by the laws of 
 England and by acts of the English Government. The system of laws made for 
 a highly complex industrial state like England are utterly out of place in a 
 country whose main pursuit is made to be agriculture. 
 
 GREAT HARBORS OF IRELAND IN IDLENESS. 
 
 The shipping controlled by England cuts Ireland off from all contact with the 
 rest of the world and keeps in idleness 20 of the greatest harbors of Europe. 
 It prevents the modern development of the ports of Cork, Limerick, Galway, 
 Sligo, and Dublin, ports which centuries ago were great trading ports, carrying 
 on extensive commerce with the countries of continental Europe. 
 
 The railroads of the smaller and poorer country are controlled by the rail¬ 
 roads of the richer and larger country, so that it cost until recently as much 
 to send a barrel of flour across from Galway to Dublin as it would to send it 
 from Chicago to Liverpool. 
 
 Most of the banks in Ireland are bought up or controlled by the banks of 
 England, with the result that the deposits are not invested in Ireland for the 
 development of its resources or the upbuilding of its industries, but are placed 
 at the disposal of English manufacturers and business men to aid in their schemes 
 for exploiting the rest of the world and beating down the industrial rivals of 
 England in Europe and in the United States of America. 
 
 The Irish mercantile marine, which for centuries carried on a commerce with 
 continental Europe and America, has been wiped out of existence by adverse 
 English laws. It has been replaced only by ships which bring Ireland’s goods 
 to England and England’s goods to Ireland in such a manner as to make the 
 Irish market to all intents and purposes the private monopoly of England. 
 
 England, roughly speaking, is one and one-half times the size of Ireland in 
 square miles. When the act of union was laid upon Ireland, January 1, 1801, 
 the population of Ireland was almost 6,000,000 and the population of England 
 was less thon 9,000,000. To-day, the population of England is over 36,000,000, 
 and the population of Ireland, according to the latest English census, is 4,390,- 
 219. At the same date which marks the application of the act of union to 
 Ireland, the population of Scotland was 1,700,000, while to-day, for the first 
 time in history, it is larger than the population of Ireland. 
 
 IRELAND VICIOUSLY MISREPRESENTED ABROAD. 
 
 If Ireland had been satisfied to become the contented province of England and 
 to abandon her fight for liberty and her desire for independence; if she would 
 consent to become absorbed into England, to become a part of the English 
 people, she would undoubtedly enjoy a prosperity that would mean all that the 
 word implies. 
 
 It is because of the fact that she will not consent to such an arrangement, it 
 is because she regards the ideal as of more consequence, even in this life, than 
 she does the material, that Ireland must continue to be misrepresented abroad. 
 If England has her way, her rule will continue in Ireland until that day and 
 that generation when the British Empire, following all the other mighty em¬ 
 pires of the past, shall hear the hour of her doom strike and shall be compelled 
 to give way to the onward inarch of events which will carry its end into the 
 mighty empire and bring freedom to the peoples all over the earth who are 
 oppressed by it. Thoughtful observers the world over agree that that day is 
 not far distant. 
 
 England has time after time overrun Ireland with her armies, with her eon- 
 fiscators, but she has never conquered Ireland, and unless all signs by which the 
 future may be gauged fail, she never can conquer Ireland. 
 
 To-day England faces an Irish race scattered all over the world, totaling 
 30,000,000 of people. She may boast that the sun never sets on the British 
 Empire, but she must also admit that it never sets on the man of Irish blood. 
 Wherever he has gone, into whatever country he may have been absorbed, he 
 remains distinctively hostile to the British Government and the things for 
 which that Government stands. 
 
 He was, as American historians tell us, the first to raise the banner of revolt 
 against England in this country. According to that scholarly volume, ‘ Hidden 
 Phases of American History,” by Michael J. O’Brien, 3S per cent of the rank 
 and file of Washington’s Army were Irishmen or sons of Irishmen—the most 
 determined, the most unfaltering enemy England had in America. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 777 
 
 He harbors no enmity against the English people, ne pities rather than 
 condemns them for the injustice under which they suffer. He understands the 
 economic slavery which is imposed upon them—but he is the untiring, the un¬ 
 faltering, enemy of the conscienceless chicanery and corrupting materialism 
 which are the chief weapons of English diplomacy. 
 
 AMERICA WAS LED INTO THE WAR TO PUT AN END TO AUTOCRACY. 
 
 England may control statesmen, she may thunder from the pulpits and she 
 may speak through the impersonal editorials of the press in various countries. 
 She may purchase poets, she may hire apologists, she may rewrite school his¬ 
 tories, but ever and always there will be men rising up throughout the world to 
 thwart her schemes, to prevent the consummation of her carefully laid plans, to 
 point out the facts of history, and to arouse the liberty-loving people of the 
 world to a realization of the fact that there can be no freedom on earth until 
 the autocracy which hides behind the mask of navalism is as completely broken 
 as was that which was covered by the garb of militarism. 
 
 England may succeed—as she lias succeeded—in cajoling or outmaneuvering 
 the spokesmen of free peoples at the conference of Versailles; she may write the 
 terms of peace there as she wrote them at Vienna a century before—but she 
 can not stifle the conscience of the world. She can not satisfy America with the 
 assertion that the war has been won because German and Russian militarism 
 has been broken. 
 
 America was led into the war to put an end to autocracy, and that means 
 autocracy in every form. America entered the war to break down special privi¬ 
 leges in all Governments and to see that not only militarism, but its twin 
 sister, navalism, was broken beyond repair. 
 
 If America had not gone into the war it would have ended in an entirely 
 different way. We threw our strength, our youth, our vigor, our idealism into 
 the scales and we freely expressed our belief that when we won—for there was 
 no “ if ” about it once we went into the war—there would be an end to 
 autocracy. 
 
 We declared there would be self-determination for all peoples; that there 
 would be freedom of the seas—that freedom for which America through all her 
 history has contended and for which she waged one victorious war. 
 
 America won the war, Sir Douglas Haig’s comments to the contrary not¬ 
 withstanding. America threw her soul, her honor, her ideals into the winning 
 of the war, and America will not now be satisfied until all the peoples of the 
 earth gather in the fruits of that victory. 
 
 There can be no just or permanent peace if, after destroying one form of 
 autocracy, we leave another form more strongly entrenched than ever and 
 resting upon a firmer foundation. The plain people throughout the world 
 will not rest while two great empires remain, their strength buttressed and 
 fortified by a peace which able spokesmen of these empires, with superior 
 courage, superior diplomacy, with greater skill, impose upon mankind. 
 
 America magnificently won the war. America has failed to make the peace. . 
 America’s spokesmen laid down splendidly the terms of peace which were to 
 satisfy the world and which were agreed to in advance by the spokesmen of 
 England, of France, of Italy. But America’s spokesmen have been outplayed, 
 outclassed, by the veteran diplomats of the latter countries. 
 
 America was satisfied with the proposed terms of peace. She is utterly dis¬ 
 satisfied with the proposed peace treaty and its accompanying league of 
 nations as drawn by Cecil and Smuts and now urged by the President of the 
 United States as something behind which he may hide the discomfiture result¬ 
 ing from his encounter with the skilled diplomats of the Old World. 
 
 Gloss over the story as one may, the fact remains that out of the conference 
 at Versailles there have emerged tw r o great powers greatly strengthened—the 
 island empires of England and Japan. These two empires are now seizing 
 and taking to themselves the choicest spots on earth, adding tremendously to 
 their already swollen power. 
 
 THE WAR, FOUGHT FOR DEMOCRACY, ENTHRONES AUTOCRACY. 
 
 England, whose spokesman assured us one hundred times during the war that 
 she sought no territory, has had, in her own accustomed style, forced upon her 
 “ unwilling ” shoulders huge strips of land which nominally belonged to the 
 German Empire but which really belonged to their inhabitants. These people. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 as the result of the war, are simply transferred from one group of exploiters 
 to another, and a more experienced group. 
 
 Forty million Chinese Republicans were torn from their own country with the 
 immense province of Shantung and turned over to the Empire of Japan, thus 
 making it larger, in point of population, than the United States of America. 
 
 England, which, before we entered the war, on the visit of Balfour to Wash¬ 
 ington, was in the throes of despair and on the verge of defeat, can now proudly 
 proclaim through her mouthpiece, Lord Cecil, that she emerges from the war 
 richer and stronger, actually and relatively, than any other country on earth. 
 
 The war, fought for democracy, may end with a peace which greatly increases 
 the power of autocracy. The war, fought to bring freedom of the seas, ends 
 with England in unquestioned control of all the oceans of the earth. The war, 
 fought to bring self-determination to all the peoples of the earth, has the doc¬ 
 trine of English pre-determination applied to some parts of the continent, in 
 order temporarily to break up and permanently to cripple her European rivals. 
 This doctrine is applied to Asia in such a way that the Japanese predetermina¬ 
 tion may apply to the continent of Asia to the end that she may eventually ab¬ 
 sorb China and be ready with her intimate ally and close friend, England, for 
 any emergency that may arise in any part of the world. 
 
 THE TWO GREAT EMPIRES INSIST THAT AMERICA GUARANTEE THEIR POSSESSIONS. 
 
 Not satisfied with their own power to retain that which the self-satisfied and 
 temporary spokesman for America has permitted them to absorb, England and 
 Japan are insisting through Clause X in the proposed League of Nations that 
 America shall guarantee for all time the present territorial integrity of the 
 two remaining empires on earth. 
 
 One little knows the fierce passion for democracy which burns in the breast 
 of the average American if he thinks that such a scheme will ever succeed. For 
 143 years, America has been fighting with ever-increasing vigor the battle of 
 democracy. 
 
 America has ever been to the forefront in the struggle for human rights. 
 She has sought to put an end in every way to the special privileges of the few. 
 She favors the rights of the many and she will not now permit any man 
 speaking for her to reverse her position, to destroy her old ideals, or to 
 prevent her from carrying on the struggle until democracy shall finally 
 triumph and the last stronghold of autocracy be destroyed. 
 
 SHANTUNG A MONSTROUS ACT. 
 
 The transfer of Shantung with its 40,000,000 people from the great young 
 democracy of China to the absolutist Empire of Japan is a monstrous act, 
 indefensible, high-handed, un-American. The attempt to have us guarantee 
 the territorial integrity of England and Japan is a monstrous and a cowardly 
 act, an attempt not alone to truckle to the strong but to trample upon and 
 destroy the rights of the weak. It would make us a party to every act of 
 tyranny that hereafter was perpetrated throughout the world. 
 
 But history shows that even if it were possible for the great Senate of the 
 United States to be false and recreant to its trust a thing like this could not 
 be permanently done. It is asking us to do the impossible. All history 
 teaches, all experience shows, that nothing is static in nature, that it is 
 impossible for one generation to so impose its will on the world as to pre¬ 
 vent a change in the boundaries of countries or in the fortunes of nations. 
 
 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS AND THE HOLY ALLIANCE. 
 
 A century ago a “ holy alliance ” undertook to do the very thing that Is 
 again being attempted to-day, but not only is the “ holy alliance ” referred 
 to nowadays by words of contempt and contumely, but the very governments 
 which brought the treaty into existence are themselves but memories. 
 
 The old or little men who for the moment from time to time control the 
 destinies of mankind may think themselves able to stop the progress of man¬ 
 kind and impose their wills upon advancing generations. But history shows 
 that even the few great outstanding figures in the history of the centuries 
 were not able thus to act for the future. And the last half century, with 
 its seven great empires thrown into the discard, shows how fate laughs 
 at the puny efforts of man to govern the future or control its destinies. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 779 
 
 The world is just entering upon a great era of growth and reconstruction, 
 yet this is the time when an old man, an older man and a* very old man in whose 
 hands fate seemed for the moment to have whimsically placed the strings of 
 the future, chose to abandon the high-sounding battle cries upon which the war 
 was waged and won, and to make another ill-conceived and badly executed bal¬ 
 ance of power under the name of the league of nations. 
 
 To do this, Clemenceau has tried to turn the wheels of time backward, tried 
 to go back to the Europe of Louis XIV, breaking down the great, peoples of the 
 continent who outnumber and outbreed the French, and to set up, all over the 
 continent, a series of buffer states that would prevent the growth of strong 
 rivals to France, and leave her in the position of being the dominant military 
 power of the continent. 
 
 England, running true to form, is entirely contented for the moment to have 
 France resume her old place among the nations, so long as she may see her 
 economic rivals on the continent broken into bits and reduced to the position of 
 impotence and poverty. 
 
 England herself, true to her predatory instincts, seizes in the name of civiliza¬ 
 tion and justice, territories almost continental in area, rich in mineral and other 
 natural resources, to be added to her already immense empire. She emerges 
 from the war not only the greatest empire in extent that the world has ever 
 known, with a monopolistic control of articles essential to the comforts and con¬ 
 veniences of mankind, but, through her unquestioned control of the seas, she 
 will strive for a practical monopoly of the commerce of the world. 
 
 England emerges from the war with but one economic or industrial rival upon 
 earth, these United States of America, whose public opinion she flatters herself 
 that she controls and whose activities she at least has been able to guide so far 
 as to make us forgive, if we did not forget, our previous experience with her. 
 
 ENGLAND SEEKS TO FLATTER AMERICA. 
 
 Tossing everything into the scales in the last great contest in which she broke, 
 at least for generations to come, the continental industrial rivals which were 
 ousting her from the markets of the world, England has won decisively and 
 absolutely, as far as empire is concerned, and now looks with complacency upon 
 the task before her of cajoling and flattering America, 
 
 Meanwhile she carries on an economic war against us which will shut us out 
 from the markets of the world, and which will gradually put us on the defensive 
 in the fight that England is waging to recover the financial supremacy of the 
 world, which she fondly believes we have but momentarily taken from her. 
 
 One plea that she has made calls attention to her tremendous sacrifices in the 
 contest which she keeps reminding us was fought for our safety as w'ell as for 
 her own interests, and which many of her spokesmen, like Sir Douglas Haig, 
 now remind us, since she is no longer in danger, was won by her and not by us. 
 
 England is shutting out the products of our manufacturers from her terri¬ 
 tories and so far as possible is shutting out our commerce in every corner of 
 the globe and is depending upon her control of the seas to eventually shut us 
 out from most of the foreign markets and leave us in the position where our 
 manufacturers must be content to sell their products in so much of our own 
 markets as Engand mry choose to leave to us. 
 
 This is in no sense an exaggeration of what she seeks and of what she hopes. 
 She relies upon the skill of her diplomats to bring tins state of affairs about. She 
 has very largely monopolized rubber, wool, and other essential products of the 
 world. She is seeking every day, with ever increasing chances of success, to 
 monopolize the oil fields of the world, while all the time, with sophisticated 
 casuistry, she keeps, through a chorus of a thousand voices raised in the press, 
 the pulpits, and the schools of America, assuring us that she alone in all the 
 world is our constant friend, that but for her and her chivalrous, unselfish 
 efforts we would have been overrun by some of the continental powers which 
 were seeking this very world power which she now possesses to the full. 
 
 She would have us believe that she fought unselfishly in the war for the very 
 purposes for which our President says we entered the war, yet her first act 
 after the war was won by us to say that the doctrine of the freedom of the seas 
 could not be even considered at Paris, and utterly unconsidered it was and still 
 remains. 
 
 She said she favored self-determination for all oppressed peoples and agreed 
 with the President when he said that no people must live under a government 
 not chosen by themselves. She must cynically smile to herself when she has 
 
780 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 the peace conference practically adjourn after having, with the help of that 
 self-determination cloak, broken her rivals into pieces without any effort having 
 been made to apply that doctrine to Ireland, to Egypt, to India, or to any of 
 the other countries of which she is in possession with only the title that a 
 robber lias to hi3 prey. 
 
 ATTEMPTS TO MAKE OVER TOE MAP OF THE WOULD IN THE DARK. 
 
 She said she favored open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, and yet 
 the “ Holy Alliance ” did not attempt to make over the map of the world with 
 the same secrecy behind which these three gentlemen hid themselves at Paris. 
 And so one might go through all of the points and find that English skill had 
 escaped or English cynicism in arousing mankind to save England, but which 
 were in the way when an English peace had to be made. 
 
 The Englishman has a genius for diplomacy. Not content with being saved 
 from destruction, not content with unprecedented gains in territory, in 
 wealth, in prestige throughout the world, he now seeks to undo what he regards 
 as mistakes of the past and to recover by mental ability that which he lost a 
 century and a half ago by force of arms. In his self-satisfaction, he takes 
 no account of the fact that the thirteen colonies, if they had continued aa 
 colonies, could not have begun to save him as the forty-eight States did actually 
 save him, as he himself must admit. 
 
 ENGLAND AIMS TO UNDO THE W r OEK OF THE REVOLUTION. 
 
 He wishes, now that his peril is for the moment past, to undo the work of 
 the Revolution, to destroy the great experiment in government which the 
 fathers set up upon these shores, and by one stroke set back the hands on the 
 clock of time for centuries. He wishes to do this in order that the special 
 form of privileged autocracy wdiich governs England may regain control of 
 this country, and with its mighty strength and unlimited resources bring 
 about that junction of the English-speaking races which his agents like Carnegie 
 and Rhodes have foretold and for v r hich they have labored for two generations. 
 
 lie has hoped, because of his easy control of things at Paris, that he would 
 find that the dead hand of Rhodes had actually won the victory. But he was 
 astounded to find not alone the Senate of the United States standing like 
 adamant against the proposed league of nations, but the public sentiment of 
 the people of America, aroused as never before, not only to defend American 
 rights, but to do what he complains of as an iinsolent thing—to interfere In 
 “ domestic ” problems of English politics. 
 
 WASHINGTON STILL THE SEAT OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. 
 
 He is horrified to find that in spite of huge expenditures, that in spite of the 
 British propaganda of Northcliffe, Parker, and others of that ilk, America re¬ 
 fuses to be made again into a colony, and that interest in the freedom of the 
 seas has been aroused in America as never before. 
 
 He had been brought to believe during the pressure of the war that American 
 public opinion was only the echo of English public opinion, and is astounded 
 now to find that his complete victory at Paris is likely to be turned into com¬ 
 plete defeat at Washington, where, in spite of his hopes to the contrary, and to 
 his utter consternation, he finds the real seat of American government still con¬ 
 tinues to be found. 
 
 THE REAL STRENGTH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 England, while hastening to assure ns in a hundred ways that she had no 
 selfish interest, to serve in asking to have the league of nations made operative 
 and the integrity of the British Empire guaranteed by the power and resources 
 of the United States, has unwittingly shown her own weakness. More and more 
 thoughtful observers throughout the world are able to read in that damand the 
 real opinion of English statesmen as to their own strength. 
 
 As a flash of lightning in a storm enables the observer in a second to see his 
 way through the darkness, so the request for such guarantee by Lord Cecil has 
 revealed the real weakness of England, instead of the apparent strength which 
 he and his group have been teaching us to observe. 
 
 It is at once made clear that the England which must call on the world to 
 guarantee its possessions is in a bad way both at home and abroad. It is an 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 781 
 
 >1 
 
 admission that it can no longer hope to call upon the strength of other countries 
 in its hour of peril in order to preserve it, as it called the world into arras 
 against France under Napoleon and against Germany under Wilhelm. 
 
 In spite of its censorship, the rumblings of industrial labor troubles 
 with miners and transport workers and railway men are being heard in 
 the land. The uprisings in India and in Egypt, the dissatisfaction in 
 Australia and in Canada, and, above all, the settled determination upon the 
 part of the people of Ireland to take at its face value the promises of Wilson, 
 Clemenceau, Lloyd-George, and Orlando, and to insist upon absolute self- 
 determination, are matters which are calling the attention of mankind to tli.* 
 fact that there is and there can be no freedom on earth while this distended 
 and gigantic appetite called the British Empire continues to threaten and to 
 prey upon mankind. 
 
 i 
 
 AMERICA IS AT THE PASTING OF THE WAYS. 
 
 The parting of the ways has come for America. Either we remain true 
 to our ideals, true to the traditions of the past, still the moral leader of 
 mankind and the hope of the oppressed people of the earth, or we join with 
 the privileged class of England and become one of the predatory powers of 
 the world. 
 
 Either we continue to lead the forces of republicanism, whether they 
 oppose the central empires of the continent, the Czars of the Itussias, or 
 whether they stand against the Cecils and Balfours of England or the 
 Mikado of Japan, and bring hope and cheer to the downtrodden people of 
 Ireland, and we stand for the preservation of American rights or we join 
 forces with Lloyd-George, that artful dodger of English politics, in his 
 efforts to further deceive the people and put off until another generation 
 the settlement of the question of Ireland. The question of Ireland, it must 
 be remembered, can only be settled right when Ireland regains her inde¬ 
 pendence and takes her place once more among the nations of the earth. 
 
 Like everything else human, America can not remain static. America must 
 either advance or retire. It must continue to lead the forces of democracy 
 in its onward march to absolute freedom, or it must join the forces of 
 autocracy and seek to snatch liberty from the other nations of the world. 
 
 AMERICA IS ASKED TO ENTER INTO AN ENTANGLING ALLIANCE. 
 
 We are asked now to abandon the advice given us by our first, and one of 
 our greatest, Presidents against entering into entangling alliances with other 
 powers. Not alone should we refuse to abandon this advice, but we should 
 more than ever make clear to the world our unfaltering determination to 
 abide by it and to make it one of the fundamental planks in our foreign 
 policy. By standing by it in the past we have grown great and prosperous, 
 masters of our own destinies, arbiters of our own fate. 
 
 We have been free to enter wars and free to remain at peace, according to 
 the exigencies of the hour and according to what we conceived to be our own 
 interest and the best policy for the protection of the liberties of mankind, 
 We have been free to govern our actions by the best light and information 
 which we could obtain upon questions at the hour of action. 
 
 Our liberty of action has not been foreclosed by reason of any commitment 
 made in advance by those who had passed off the stage of action or were no 
 longer in a position to speak for the majority of the people of our country. In 
 other words, we have always been in the position of being governed by the living 
 will of the present, rather than by the dead hand of the past. 
 
 Not along every mandate of interest, but the high call of idealism should 
 counsel us to remain in that position and not commit ourselves to any alliance 
 which, obeying the passion and meeting the whim of the hour, could commit 
 those who come after us to labors and sacrifices which they should not be asked 
 to undertake except at their own free will and upon good cause shown to them 
 at the hour of sacrifice. 
 
 We are asked now to be satisfied with a declaration of the Monroe doctrine, 
 which according to many thoughtful observers, weakens and jeopardizes rather 
 than strengthens that cardinal principle of American diplomacy. In this hour 
 wdien a peace conference, called into existence for the purpose of making peace, 
 did not content itself with settling the questions at issue between the belliger¬ 
 ents, but w^eut up and down the world seeking problems it might settle, vr* 
 
782 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 should extend and strengthen, rather than weaken, the doctrine laid down by 
 James Monroe. 
 
 We should insist that the Western Hemisphere be not invaded by any 
 power from the East; that no old-world possessions held here are to be in¬ 
 creased, and we should also insist upon the absolute withdrawal from this 
 territory of the flag of every empire or monarchy. 
 
 THE BRITISH FLAG SHOULD BE COMPELLED TO FOLLOW THE OTHER FLAGS FROM OUR 
 
 SHORES. 
 
 What is sacrosanct about the British Empire that it continues to rule vast 
 sections of the American continent after all other empires have left its shores? 
 The flag of Russia, of Spain, of Portugal, of Denmark have been withdrawn 
 from this hemisphere. Why should we not now Insist that the flag of England 
 should follow the others and leave here in this hemisphere, dedicated for all 
 time to liberty and republicanism, only the flags of the free? 
 
 Why should not our great neighbor on the north, which Cecil undoubtedly 
 hopes some day to use as a weapon to smite us, should the economic war now 
 being waged between the countries ever reach the acute stage of military or 
 naval warfare, or if there ever should come a conflict between England’s ally, 
 Japan, and ourselves—why should not that great country have an opportunity 
 of taking, its place among the republics of the earth, or even, if it chooses, 
 of joining our country and thus bridging the gulf which separates us from 
 our great territory of Alaska. 
 
 The ties which bind the people of Canada to us are every day increasing 
 in number and in strength. The ties of trade which bind us are natural and 
 are varied in form. The Great Lakes that lie between us are not intended 
 to separate us, but should, by a thousand ties of commerce, draw us more 
 closely together. Great numbers of our people come from the same racial 
 stocks and in the late war, according to reports coming from ever-increasing 
 sources through our returned soldiers, our own soldiers found a dozen ways 
 in which they resembled one another for every day in which either found that 
 they resembled the British soldiers. 
 
 CHAMBERLAIN HAS SAID THAT AN ADJOINING REPUBLIC IS A MENACE. 
 
 Thoughtful observers in the United States as well as in Canada realize 
 that our interests are in the Western rather than in the Eastern Hemisphere, 
 and that the views of an ever-increasing number of Canadians with relation 
 to the future of Ireland, the future of Shantung, are those of a majority of 
 the people of America rather than those of the governing body of England. 
 
 The people of Canada are essentially a freedom-loving people, aside from 
 what is pleased to call itself the governing class, which seeks for special 
 privileges like the same class in England. Canadians desire liberty for them¬ 
 selves and would like to see the blessings of liberty given to every people. 
 
 More than that, if there be anything in the repeated declarations of Joseph 
 Chamberlain in his attempts to justify the rubbing out of the two little re¬ 
 publics of South Africa that republican institutions adjoining British territory 
 were a menace to Britain, the governing class in England can look upon the 
 continued existence of the American republic only as a menace to England 
 and we have now the right to ask of her, having saved England, that as an 
 evidence of her good faith in saying that she is a friend of liberty, that she 
 withdraw her flag from this continent and leave it to be entirely dedicated 
 to liberty and freedom. 
 
 MAN IS SIGHING FOR PEACE. 
 
 The late war aroused mankind to a realization of the fact that without 
 regard to the boundaries of a country or the lines of race, war is a curse to 
 mankind; that it takes not only millions of a generation to death and leaves 
 other millions subject to sickness and disease as an aftermath, but it imposes 
 on the future generations a back-breaking burden of taxation which means 
 countless hardships and privations, while it brings only to the specially priv¬ 
 ileged peoples in every country immense fortunes which break down the founda¬ 
 tions of liberty and sap the principles on which freedom exists. 
 
 Without regard to race or religion, man is sighing for peace. He realizes 
 that war is an abnormal condition, that peace is the normal condition, and 
 
TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 783 
 
 men are seeking as they have never sought before, to insure a peace that will 
 prevent and destroy war. 
 
 HOrES BASED ON FEAC'E CONFERENCE VANISH LIKE A DREAM. 
 
 Mankind lived in the hope that the peace conference was to be a setting 
 for the ending of all wars. Peoples were to be taken from the thraldom of 
 their aggressors, natural boundaries were to be established between States, 
 armaments were to be destroyed, cannon were to be made into plowshares, 
 and the fourteen points of President Wilson were to be made the basis of an 
 enduring peace. 
 
 The peace conference has practically adjournd and all the hopes that were 
 based upon it are passing into oblivion like the illusions of dreams. But the 
 mass of mankind is more than ever insistent that there must be an end to 
 human destruction and to the awful butchery and suffering that modern war 
 spells for humanity. It has been driven into their minds that only by freedom 
 to the oppressed of all nations can peace come, putting an end to* the rule of 
 the few and by bringing about government by the many, bringing at once 
 liberty to man and an end to all war. 
 
 There may be for a short time a brief respite for those who remain in power, 
 though they have deceived the people who have seen promises solemnly made, 
 lightly broken. But no just or permanent peace can be made until the pur¬ 
 poses to which the American people set their hands when they entered the 
 war have been attained, until autocracy in all its forms has been destroyed, 
 until not alone the militarism that was breaking the back of Europe but the 
 navalism which is oppressing and controlling the whole world shall be de¬ 
 stroyed and the right of self-determination shall be given, not alone to some, 
 but to all the peoples of the earth. 
 
 A COURT OF NATIONS. 
 
 A court of nations will come in its own due time that will embrace all the 
 people of the earth, that will see to it that all peoples are free, and that will 
 see to it that the World War will actually bring a permanent peace. Such a 
 court will exalt justice and will destroy tyranny, but it will be a real court, 
 open to all peoples, and not an unreal league which is only another name for 
 an Anglo-American alliance, a Cecil-Smus plan to exalt autocracy and enslav® 
 mankind. 
 
 Every red-blooded man favors such a court of nations as he favors the 
 brotherhood of man and the counsel of perfection, but the more intensely he 
 favors such an ideal the more he objects to and abhors the hypocrisy which 
 wmuld steal the ideal in order to cover a treaty of alliance that would fasten 
 the robber grip of England on all the w T orld. 
 
 THE GUARANTIES OF IRELAND. 
 
 Having set forth the claims of Ireland to independence, her demand and her 
 right to be free; having exposed the hypocrisy of England in her varied at¬ 
 tempts to confuse the issue, having torn away the mask behind which England 
 hoped to securely hide from the gaze of the world, let us see w 7 hat Ireland offers 
 to the world as an evidence of her good faith. 
 
 The people of Ireland seek for themselves a form of government which would 
 do justice to all the people within the four shores of Ireland. They seek to 
 set up a government representing equality to all, injustice to none. They de¬ 
 mand and will insist upon political equality and religious freedom for all the 
 people of Ireland. 
 
 They insist that the majority must rule, but that the rights of political 
 equality and religious freedom shall be given to all members of the minority as 
 well as of the majority. 
 
 The people of Ireland believe that the minority is entitled to guaranties, 
 but not to control. They are ready to embody a guaranty of these rights in 
 their constitution, as they have been embodied in the Constitution of the United 
 States. 
 
 They are ready to adopt these things w T hich made for success in America and 
 to avoid those things which were found to be mistakes or errors* 
 
784 
 
 TEE AT Y OE PEACE WITH GERMANY* 
 
 CONTRASTS IRELAND AND AMERICA. 
 
 As a result of the Revolution in America estates were confiscated and men 
 were exiled. The people of Ireland, however, are ready to say to the small 
 group in Ulster who say they can not remain as an integral part of the Irish 
 people that they would part with them with regret, but will guarantee to them, 
 if they choose to sell, the full market value of all property which they own 
 in Ireland. 
 
 The people of Ireland ask every man of whatever blood, or whatever religion, 
 who is now in Ireland to remain in Ireland on terms which will insure abso¬ 
 lute equality for all. They point out that there is no instance in its history 
 of religious persecution or racial intolerance due to the majority of the people 
 of Ireland; that wherever there has been persecution it has been by the minor¬ 
 ity, urged on against the majority by the English Government. 
 
 The people of Ireland point out that in every section of the country, in 
 every generation, Protestants of different sect or religious persuasions have 
 been put forward as leaders by a majority of the Irish people,, called to the 
 highest elective office within the gift of the majority of the people. They urge 
 that no fairer way of judging the future can be found than that furnished 
 by the experiences of the past. 
 
 They are willing at all times to accord to others the rights which they insist 
 upon for themselves. They demand, without further delay, that their present, 
 rights shall be recognized by the world and that international recognition shall 
 be given to the republican form of government established in Ireland after a 
 plebiscite held on her shores last December, in the presence of the great Eng¬ 
 lish army of occupation and under conditions which held the machinery of 
 government at that time in the hands of Great Britain. 
 
 AU that any friend of Ireland asks of America is that present conditions 
 in Ireland be studied fairly and dispassionately. In no other part of the 
 world can there be found a parallel to the manner in wdiich the population of 
 Ireland has been reduced by the English Government within the past 70 years. 
 
 Why should England that cried out with such strength against injustice in 
 Belgium, be permitted to maintain and continue her rule of might in Ireland? 
 Even her apologists admit that England's rule in Ireland is based only upon 
 her bayonets and cannon. 
 
 How can England satisfy the conscience of the world with her explanation 
 that what is wrong in Belgium and in Alsace is right in Ireland? She say3 
 that the people .of Ireland should not cry out for liberty because, forsooth, they 
 are to-day enjoying a larger measure of prosperity than they formerly had. 
 Wliy should they not have it? Is it not the result only of their own thrift, 
 their own Industry, their own labors? 
 
 The apologists of England say that Ireland did an immense business with 
 that country last year—that this is a sufficient answer to Ireland’s cry that 
 she is badly governed! How typical was Clive of the English Government of 
 all times when he said, after he had been accused of robbing India of immense 
 treasure, that when he saw the wealth of the country he was astonished at his 
 own moderation! England’s statesmen feel that it is right to steal Irish sheep 
 so long as they return a chop to the Irish owner. 
 
 The proposition Is an insult to the intelligence and conscience of the world 
 and in spite of the marvelous system of propaganda w r hich the English diplomat 
 has built up, he can not prevent the cry of Ireland for freedom from resounding 
 in all parts of the world and coming back to plague him until it is satisfied 
 by having justice done to Ireland. 
 
 The English governing class are the Bourbons of modem days. They learn 
 nothing, forget nothing. Let them beware lest the aroused public opinion of 
 mankind shall sweep them as it swept their German and Russian cousins into 
 oblivion and break into bits the British Empire, which is the last bulwark of 
 autocracy against the onrusliing tide of liberty and democracy. 
 
 Judge Daniel F. Cohalan, following the conclusion of his oral 
 argument, by permission of the committee was authorized to have in¬ 
 corporated as a part of the testimony presented the following: 
 
785 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 • 
 
 Ireland’s Declaration of Independence and Other Official Documents. 
 
 Including Letters to the President of the Peace Conference and the 
 
 General Memorandum Submitted in Support of Ireland’s Claim for Recog¬ 
 nition as a Sovereign Independent State. 
 
 IRELAND’S DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE—PROCLAIMED BY DAEL ETREANN, JANUARY 
 
 21, 1919. 
 
 [Translation.] 
 
 Whereas the Irish people is by right a free people; 
 
 And whereas for 700 years the Irish people has never ceased to repudiate and 
 has repeatedly protested in arms against foreign usurpation; 
 
 And whereas English rule in this country is, and always has been, based upon 
 force and fraud and maintained by military occupation against the declared 
 will of the people; 
 
 And whereas the Irish republic was proclaimed in Dublin on Easter Monday, 
 191G, by the Irish republican army, acting on behalf of the Irish people; 
 
 And whereas the Irish people is resolved to secure and maintain its complete 
 independence in order to promote the common weal, to reestablish justice, to 
 provide for future defense, to insure peace at home and good will with all 
 nations, and to constitute a national policy based upon the people’s will, with 
 equal right and equal opportunity for every citizen; 
 
 And whereas at the threshold of a new era in history the Irish electorate 
 has in the general election of December, 1918, seized the first occasion to declare 
 by an overwhelming majority its firm allegiance to the Irish republic; 
 
 Now, therefore, we, the elected representatives of the ancient Irish people, in 
 national parliament assembled, do, in the name of the Irish nation, ratify tha 
 establishment of the Irish republic, and pledge ourselves and our people to make 
 this declaration effective by every means at our command. 
 
 To ordain that the elected representatives of the Irish people alone have 
 power to make laws binding on the people of Ireland, and that the Irish parlia¬ 
 ment is the only .parliament to which that people will give its allegiance. 
 
 We solemnly declare foreign government in Ireland to be an invasion of our 
 national right, which we will never tolerate, and we demand the evacuation of 
 our country by the English garrison; 
 
 We claim for our national independence the recognition and support of every 
 free nation of the world, and we proclaim that independence to be a condition 
 precedent to international peace hereafter; 
 
 In the name of the Irish people we humbly commit our destiny to Almighty 
 God, who gave our fathers the courage and determination to persevere through 
 centuries of a ruthless tyranny, and strong in the justice of the cause which 
 tliey have handed down to us, we ask His divine blessing on this, the last stage 
 of the struggle which we have pledged ourselves to carry through to freedom. 
 
 Ireland’s message to the nations. 
 
 [Translation,] 
 
 To the nations of the world, greeting: 
 
 The nation of Ireland, having proclaimed her national independence, calls, 
 through her elected representatives in parliament assembled in the Irish capital 
 on January 21, 1919, upon every free nation to support the Irish republic by 
 recognizing Ireland’s national status and her right to its vindication by the 
 peace congress. 
 
 Nationally, the race, the language, the customs, and traditions of Ireland are 
 radically distinct from the English. Ireland is one of the most ancient nations 
 of Europe, and she has preserved her national integrity vigorous and intact 
 through seven centuries of foreign oppression; she has never relinquished her 
 national rights, and throughout the long era of English usurpation she has in 
 every generation defiantly proclaimed her inalienable right of nationhood down 
 to her last glorious resort to arms in 1916. 
 
 Internationally, Ireland is the gateway to the Atlantic. Ireland is the last 
 outpost of Europe toward the west; Ireland is the point upon which great 
 trade routes between east and west converge; her independence is demanded 
 by the freedom of the seas; her great harbors must be open to all nations, 
 instead of being the monopoly of England. To-day these harbors are empty 
 and idle solely because English policy is determined to retain Ireland as a 
 
786 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY^ 
 
 barren bulwark for English aggrandizement, and the unique geographical posi¬ 
 tion of this island, far from being a benefit and safeguard to Europe and 
 America, is subjected to the purposes of England’s policy of world dominion. 
 
 Ireland to-day reasserts her historic nationhood the more confidently before 
 the new world emerging from the war, because she believes in freedom and 
 justice as the fundamental principles of international law; because she believes 
 in- a frank cooperation between the peoples for equal rights against the vested 
 privileges of ancient tyrannies, because the permanent peace of Europe can 
 never be secured by perpetuating military dominion for the profit of empire, 
 but only by establishing the control of government in every land upon the 
 basis of the free will of a free people, and the existing state of war between 
 Ireland and England can never be ended until Ireland is definitely evacuated 
 by the armed forces of England. 
 
 For these, among other reasons, Ireland—resolutely and irrevocably de¬ 
 termined at the dawn of the promised era of self-determination and liberty, 
 that she will suffer foreign dominion no longer—calls upon every free nation 
 to uphold her national claim to complete independence as an Irish republic 
 against the arrogant pretensions of England founded in fraud and sustained 
 only by an overwhelming military occupation, and demands to be confronted 
 publicly with England at the congress of nations, that the civilized world 
 naving judged between English wrong and Irish right may guarantee to Ireland 
 its permanent support for the maintenance of her national independence. 
 
 ieeland’s democratic program—proclaimed by dail eireann. 
 
 [Translation.] 
 
 We declare in the words of the Irish Republican Proclamation the right of 
 the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland and to the unfettered control 
 of Irish destinies to be indefeasible, and in the language of our first president, 
 Padraic Pearse, we declare that the nation’s sovereignty extends not only to 
 all men and women of the nation, but to all its material possessions; the 
 nation’s soil and ail its resources, all the wealth and all the wealth-producing 
 processes within the nation; and with him we reaffirm that all rights to pri¬ 
 vate property must be subordinated to the public right' and welfare. 
 
 We declare that w T e desire our country to be ruled in accordance with the 
 principles of liberty, equality, and justice for all, which alone can secure per¬ 
 manence of government in the willing adhesion of the people. 
 
 We affirm the duty of every man and woman to give allegiance and service 
 to the commonwealth, and declare it is the duty of the nation to assure that 
 every citizen shall have opportunity to spend his or her strength and faculies 
 in the service of the people. In return for willing service, we, in the name of 
 the republic, declare the right of every citizen to an adequate share of the 
 produce of the nation’s labor. 
 
 It shall be the first duty of the government of the republic to make pro¬ 
 vision for the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of the children, to 
 secure that no child shall suffer hunger or cold from lack of food or clothing 
 or shelter, but that all shall be provided with the means and facilities requisite 
 for their proper education and training as citizens of a free and Gaelic Ireland. 
 
 The Irish republic fully realizes the necessity of abolishing the present 
 odious, degrading, and foreign poor-law system, substituting therefor a sympa¬ 
 thetic native scheme for the care of the nation’s aged and infirm, who shall no 
 longer be regarded as a burden, but rather entitled to the nation’s gratitude 
 and consideration. Likewise it shall be the duty of the republic to take 
 measures that wall safeguard the health of the people and insure the physical 
 as w'ell as the moral well-being of the nation. 
 
 It shall be our duty to promote the development of the nation’s resources, 
 to increase the productivity of the soil, to exploit its mineral deposis, peat 
 bogs, and fisheries, its waterways and harbors, in the interest and for the benefit 
 of the Irish people. 
 
 It shall be the duty of the republic to adopt all measures necessary for the 
 re-creation and invigoration of our industries, and to insure their being de¬ 
 veloped on the most beneficial and progressive cooperative industrial lines. 
 With the adoption of an extensive Irish consular service, trade with foreign 
 nations shall be revived on terms of mutual advantage and good will; while 
 undertaking the organization of the nation’s trade, import and export, it shall 
 be the duty of the republic to prevent the shipment from Ireland of food 
 and other necessaries until the wants of the Irish people are fully satisfied 
 and the future provided for. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 787 
 
 It shall devolve upon the national government to seek the cooperation of 
 the governments of other countries in determining a standard of social and 
 Industrial legislation with a view to a general and lasting improvement in the 
 conditions under which the working classes live and labor. 
 
 LETTER FROM THE IRISH DELEGATES APPOINTED BY DAIL E1REANN TO PRESENT 
 
 IRELAND’S CASE. 
 
 Mansion House, Dublin, May 17 , 1919. 
 
 Monsieur Clemenceau, 
 
 President of the Peace Conference, Paris. 
 
 Sir : The treaties now under discussion by the conference of Paris will, pre¬ 
 sumably, be signed by the British plenipotentiaries claiming to act on behalf of 
 Ireland as well as Great Britain. 
 
 Therefore we ask you to call the immediate attention of the peace confer¬ 
 ence to the warning which it is our duty to communicate, that the people of 
 Ireland, through all its organic means of declaration, has repudiated and does 
 now repudiate the claim of the British Government to speak or act on behalf 
 of Ireland, and consequently no treaty or agreement entered into by the repre¬ 
 sentatives of the British Government in virtue of that claim is or can be bind¬ 
 ing on the people of Ireland. 
 
 The Irish people will scrupulously observe any treaty obligation to which 
 they are legitimately committed; but the British delegates can not commit 
 Ireland. The only signatures by which the Irish nation will be bound are 
 those of its own delegates, deliberately chosen. 
 
 We request you to notify the peace conference that we, the undersigned, have 
 been appointed and authorized by the duly elected Government of Ireland to 
 act on behalf of Ireland in the proceedings of the conference and to enter into 
 agreements and sign treaties on behalf of Ireland. 
 
 Accept, sir, the assurance of our great esteem. 
 
 Eamon de Yalera, 
 
 Arthur Griffith, 
 
 George Noble Count Plunkett. 
 
 LETTER FROM THE IRISH DELEGATES APPOINTED BY DAIL EIREANN TO PRESENT 
 
 IRELAND’S CASE. 
 
 Mansion House, Dublin, May 26, 1919. 
 
 Monsieur Georges Clemenceau, 
 
 President of the Peace Co'nference, Paris. 
 
 Sir: On May 17 we forwarded to you a note requesting you to warn the 
 conference that the Irish people will not be bound by the signatures of English 
 or British delegates to the conference, inasmuch as these delegates do not 
 
 represent Ireland. 
 
 We now further request that you will provide an opportunity for the con¬ 
 sideration by the conference of Ireland’s claim to be recognized as an inde¬ 
 pendent sovereign state. 
 
 We send you herewith a general memorandum on the case and beg to direct 
 your attention in particular to the following: 
 
 (1) That the rule of Ireland by England has been and is now intolerable; 
 that it is contrary to all conceptions of liberty and justice, and as such, on the 
 ground of humanity alone, should be ended by the conference. 
 
 (2) That the declared object of the conference is to establish a lasting peace 
 which is admittedly impossible if the legitimate claims of self-determination 
 of nations such as Ireland be denied. 
 
 (3) That incorporated with the peace treaty under consideration as a cove¬ 
 nant establishing a league of nations intended amongst other things to confirm 
 and perpetuate the political relationships and conditions established by the 
 treaty. It is clear that it is radically unjust to seek to confirm and perpetuate 
 what is essentially wrong and that it is indefensible to refuse an examination 
 of title when a confirmation of possession is intended such as that provided 
 by the draft covenant of the League of Nations. 
 
 ' Ireland definitely denies that England or Britain can show any just claim 
 or title to hold or possess Ireland and demands an opportunity for her repre¬ 
 sentatives to appear before the conference to refute any such claim. 
 
 135549°—19-3 
 
788 
 
 TKEATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 We feel that these facts are sufficient basis to merit for our requests the 
 consideration which we are sure you, sir, will give them. 
 
 Please accept, Mr. President, the assurance of our great esteem. 
 
 Eamon De Valera, 
 
 Arthur Griffith, 
 
 George Noble Count Plunkett. 
 
 LETTER EROM THE IRISH DELEGATES APPOINTED BY DAIL ERREANN TO PRESENT 
 
 IRELAND’S CASE. 
 
 Mansion House, Dublin, May 26, 1019. 
 
 To the Chairman, 
 
 Council of League of Nations, Paris. 
 
 Sir: The Irish people share the view that a lasting peace can only be se¬ 
 cured by a world league of nations pledged, when a clash of interests occurs, 
 to use methods of conciliation and arbitration instead of those of force. They 
 are consequently desirous that their nation should be included as a constituent 
 member of such a league. 
 
 Therefore, we, the delegates of the nation, chosen and duly authorized for 
 the purpose by the elected National Government of Ireland, desire to intimate 
 through you that we are ready to take part in any conversations and discus¬ 
 sions which may be necessary in order that the foundations of the league may 
 be properly laid, and we ask the commission to provide us with an opportunity 
 for doing so. 
 
 Apart from the general grounds of right, the Irish nation has a special and 
 peculiar interest in the league at present proposed. 
 
 In the form in which the covenant is now drawn up it threatens to confirm 
 Ireland in the slavery against which she has persistently struggled since the 
 English first invaded her shores, and to pledge the rest of the civilized world, 
 which has hitherto done us no wrong, to discountenance in future our just 
 endeavors to free ourselves from the regime of implacable and brutal oppression 
 under which we have suffered so long. 
 
 Ireland is a distinct and separate nation with individual inalienable rights 
 which any league of nations founded on justice is bound to recognize. 
 
 Accept, sir, the assurance of our great esteem. 
 
 Eamon De Valera, 
 
 Arthur Griffith, 
 
 George Noble Count Plunkett. 
 
 ©’kelly’s IJCTTEB NO. 1 TO PREMIER CLEMENCEAU AND ALL THE PEACE CONFERENCE 
 
 DELEGATES. 
 
 Paris, February 33^ 1919. 
 
 Sir: As the accredited envoy of the provisional government of the Irish 
 republic, I have the honor to bring to your notice the claim of my government, 
 in the name of the Irish nation, for the international recognition of the inde¬ 
 pendence of Ireland, and for the admission of Ireland as a constituent member of 
 the league of nations. 
 
 The Irish people seized the opportunity of the general election of December, 
 1018, to declare unmistakably its national will; only in 26 (out of 105) constitu¬ 
 encies of the country was England able to find enough “ loyalists " to return 
 members favorable to the union between Ireland and Great Britain; for the re¬ 
 maining 79 seats the electors chose as members men who believed in self-deter¬ 
 mination ; of these, 73 who now represent an immense majority of the people 
 went forward as republican candidates, and each of these republican members 
 has pledged himself to assert by every means in his power the right of Ireland 
 to the complete independence which she demands, under a national republican 
 government, free from all English interferences. 
 
 On the 21st of January, 1919, those of the republican members whom England 
 had not yet cast into her prisons met in the Irish capital in a national assembly, 
 to which, as the only Irish parliament de jure, they had summoned all Irish 
 members of parliament; on the same day the national assembly unanimously 
 voted the declaration of independence appended hereto and unanimously issued 
 the message to the free nations, likewise appended. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 789 
 
 The national assembly has also caused a detailed statement of the case of 
 Ireland to be drawn up; that statement will demonstrate that the right of Ire¬ 
 land to be considered a nation admits of no denial, and, moreover, that that 
 right is inferior in no respect to that of the new States constituted in Europe 
 and recognized since the war; three members, Eamon de Valera, Mr. Arthur 
 Griffith, and Count Plunkett, have been delegated by the national assembly to 
 present the statement to the peace congress and to the league of nations com¬ 
 mission in the name of the Irish people. 
 
 Accordingly, I have the honor, sir, to beg you to be good enough to fix a date 
 to receive the delegates above named, who are anxious for the earliest possible 
 opportunity to establish formally and definitely before the peace conference 
 and the league of nations commission now assembled in Paris Ireland’s indisput¬ 
 able right to international recognition for her independence and the propriety of 
 her claim to enter the league of nations as one of its constituent members. 
 
 I have the honor to be, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant. 
 
 Sean T. O’Iyelly, 
 
 Delegate of the Provisional Government of the Irish Republic. 
 
 O’KELLY's LETTER—NO. 2 . 
 
 Paris, March 31, 1910. 
 
 To Premier Clemenceau and all the peace conference delegates. 
 
 Sir: On behalf of the Irish nation, whose accredited representative I am, I 
 beg to draw your attention, and through you the attention of the peace con¬ 
 ference, to the following statement with regard to Ireland: 
 
 Ireland is a nation which has exercised the right of self-determination in 
 harmony with the principles formulated by President Wilson and accepted by 
 the belligerents as the only sure foundation for a world peace. It is not only 
 in the past that Ireland, generation after generation, has striven by force of 
 arms as well as by all pacific means to regain her national freedom. At the 
 general election last December the Issue, and the only issue, placed before the 
 Irish people was the independence of their country, and by a majority of more 
 than three to one the representatives elected by the constitutional machinery 
 of the ballot box are pledged to the abolition of English rule in Ireland. In 
 none of the small nationalities with which the peace conference has hitherto 
 occupied itself is the unanimity of the people so great; in none has the 
 national desire for freedom been so great; in none has the desire for freedom 
 been asserted so unmistakably and with so much emphasis. Following upon 
 the general election, an Irish National Assembly has met; an Irish Republic 
 has been constituted and proclaimed to the world; a President has been ap¬ 
 pointed, and with him ministers to direct different departments of state; a 
 program of domestic policy has been issued; and an appeal has been addressed 
 to the nations of the world to recognize the free Irish State that has thu3 
 been recalled to life. But while the national will has been declared and the 
 mechanism of free government is ready, the former is being stifled and the 
 latter paralyzed by England’s ruthless exercise of military power. The Presi¬ 
 dent is a fugitive; the Irish Parliament is forced to conduct its business in 
 secret; the most elementary civil rights are abrogated; the courts-martial are 
 sitting at every center; and the gaols are filled with prisoners, victims of 
 every brutality and indignity, whose only offense is that they have sought the 
 freedom of their native land. It is in these circumstances that the Irish 
 nation, through me, addresses the peace conference. 
 
 Ireland manifestly comes within the scope of the principles that have been 
 indorsed by the civilized nations, and it is for the application of these princi¬ 
 ples that the peace conference is now sitting. Ireland is weak; England is 
 strong. Ireland in every possible way has asserted her right to freedom, which 
 England, by sheer militarism, is intent now, as always in the past, to destroy. 
 It is only by the exercise of tyrannical power that Ireland’s right to freedom 
 can be denied. It is to the great principle of national freedom, represented and 
 embodied in the peace conference, that Ireland, exhausted by the cruelties of 
 English rule, her population annihilated by one-half within living memory, her 
 industries destroyed, her natural resources wasted, her civil liberties ended, 
 her chosen leaders proscribed and treated as felons, now makes her appeal. 
 
790 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 Article 10 of tlie draft covenant of the league of nations is framed to secure 
 national independence against the aggression of an external power. Its terms 
 are as follows: 
 
 “ The high contracting powers undertake to respect and preserve as against 
 external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence 
 of all States members of the league. In case of any eggression or in case of 
 any threat or danger of such aggression the executive council shall advise upon 
 the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled.” 
 
 Ireland, as a nation that has declared its independence and is pledged to the 
 principles of freedom, justice, and peace, desires to subscribe to the covenant of 
 the league and to claim as against England the protection of article 10. I 
 submit to the conference with profound respect that Ireland’s claim is clear 
 and can not with any shadow of justice be refused. Should it be rejected, the 
 consequences would be as follows: 
 
 1. Ireland henceforth must rely for her deliverance wholly upon her own 
 efforts. No such rule has been laid down with regard to any other of the 
 smaller nationalities whose emancipation has been made the care of the con¬ 
 ference. 
 
 2. Nations which never have denied the right of Ireland to freedom will 
 deprive themselves for the future of the power of countenancing her claim, 
 and will in consequence be bound, for the first time in history, to leave her 
 unaided to her own resources as indicated in the preceding paragraph. 
 
 3. Article 10 will impose upon all nations as a condition of membership of the 
 league the obligation to guarantee to Great Britain a title to the possession of 
 Ireland and dominion over the Irish people. 
 
 Against the imposition of such slavery upon Ireland, and especially against 
 the giving of such a guaranty of title to Great Britain, I enter on behalf of the 
 people of Ireland, in whose name I have the honor to speak, the most emphatic 
 protest. 
 
 Great Britain’s title to Ireland rests solely upon “ the militaiy power of a 
 nation to determine the fortunes of a people over whom they have no right to 
 rule except the right of force.” 
 
 The combined guaranty of such a title against the declared protest of Ireland 
 would constitute a definite denial of “ the principle of justice to all peoples and 
 nationalities and their right to live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one 
 another, whether strong or weak,” and without the acceptance of that principle 
 “ no part of the structure of international justice can stand.” 
 
 The guaranty of such a title would be subversive of “ the reign of law based 
 upon the consent of the governed and sustained by the organized opinion of 
 mankind.’’ 
 
 The guaranty of such a title would constitute recognition of the right of a 
 strong power to serve its own material interest and advantage through the exer¬ 
 cise of its “ exterior influence and mastery.” 
 
 The guaranty of such a title would give Great Britain a warrant to make a 
 nation weaker than herself “ subject to her purposes and interests.” It would 
 confirm the claim of Great Britain to rule and dominate the people of Ireland 
 “ even in her own internal affairs by arbitrary and irresponsible force.” 
 
 Any guaranty under article 10 of territorial integrity and political independ¬ 
 ence as affecting Ireland can rightly enure only to the benefit of the people of 
 Ireland themselves. 
 
 In the name, therefore, of the people of Ireland I ask that the Irish nation 
 may be invited to give their adhesion to the covenant of the league of nations, 
 and that membership of the league—a membership available under article 7, 
 even to colonies who have freely and legislatively subscribed to the supremacy 
 of the English Imperial Parliament—shall not be denied to the government 
 of a free, independent Irish republic. 
 
 I have the honor to be, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 Sean T. O’Kelly, 
 
 Delegate of the Provisional Government of the Irish Republic. 
 
 MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF IRELAND’S CLAIM FOR RECOGNITION AS A SOVEREIGN 
 
 INDEPENDENT STATE. 
 
 Ireland is a nation not merely for the reason, which in the case of other 
 countries has been taken as sufficient, that she has claimed at all times and still 
 claims to be a nation but also because, even though no claim were put forward 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 791 
 
 on her behalf, history shows her to be a distinct nation from remotely ancient 
 times. 
 
 For over a thousand years Ireland possessed and duly exercised sovereign 
 independence and was recognized through Europe as a distinct sovereign state. 
 
 The usurpation of the foreigner has always been disputed and resisted by the 
 mass of the Irish people. 
 
 At various times since the coming of the English the Irish nation has exer¬ 
 cised its sovereign rights as opportunity offered. 
 
 The hope of recovering its full and permanent sovereignty has always been 
 alive in the breasts of the Irish people, and has been the inspiration and the 
 mainspring of their political activities abroad as well as at home. 
 
 English statecraft has long and persistently striven in vain to force the Irish 
 people to abandon hope. The English policy of repression, spiritual and mate¬ 
 rial, has ever been active from the first intrusion of English power until the 
 present day. 
 
 English policy has always aimed at keeping every new accretion of population 
 from without separate from the rest of the nation, and a cause of distraction 
 and weakness in its midst. 
 
 Nevertheless, the Irsh nation has remained one, with a vigorous conscious¬ 
 ness of its nationality, and has always succeeded sooner or later in assimilating 
 to its unity every new element of the population. 
 
 The Irish nation has never been intolerent toward its minorities and has 
 never harbored the spirit of persecution. Such barbarities as punishment by 
 torture, witch burning, capital punishment for minor offenses, etc., so fre¬ 
 quent in the judicial systems of other countries, found no recognition in Irish 
 law or custom. Twice in the seventeenth century—in 1642-1648 and in 1689— 
 when, after periods of terrible persecution and deprivation of lands and liberty, 
 the Irish people recovered for a time a dominant political power, they worked 
 out in laws and treaties a policy of full religious equality for all dwellers in the 
 island. On each occasion this policy of tolerance was reversed by the English 
 power, which, on recovering its mastery, subjected the Irish race to further 
 large confiscations of property, restrictions of liberty, and religious persecu¬ 
 tions. More recently, notwithstanding the English policy of maintaining as 
 complete a severence as possible, when Irish Protestants became attracted to 
 the support of the national cause, the Catholics of Ireland accorded political 
 leadership to a succession of Protestant leaders. 
 
 The Irish have long been a thoroughly democratic people. Through their 
 chosen leaders, from O’Connell to Parnell, they have provided the world with 
 a model of democratic organization in opposition to the domination of privileged 
 classes. 
 
 If Ireland, on the grounds of national right and proved ability to maintain 
 just government, is entitled to recover her sovereign independence—and that 
 is her demand—the recognition of her right is due from other nations for the 
 following reasons: 
 
 (1) Because England’s claim to withhold independence from Ireland is based 
 on a principle which is a negation of national liberty and subversive of inter¬ 
 national peace and order. England resists Ireland’s demand on the ground 
 that the independence of Ireland would be, as alleged, incompatible with the 
 security of England or of Great Britain or of the British Empire. Whether 
 this contention is well or ill founded, if it is admitted, then any State is justified 
 in suppressing the independence of any nation whose liberty that State declares 
 to be incompatible with its own security. An endless prospect of future wars is 
 the natural consequence. 
 
 (2) Because England’s government of Ireland has been at all times and 
 is conspicuously at the present time an outrage on the conscience of mankind. 
 
 Such a government, especially in its modern quasi-democratic form, is 
 essentially vicious. Its character at the best is sufficiently described by a 
 noted English writer, John Stuart Mill (Representative Government (1861) 
 chapter 18) : “The Government by itself has a meaning and a reality, but such 
 a thing as government of one people by another does not and can not exist. 
 One people may keep another as a warren or preserve for its own use, a place 
 to make money in, a human cattle farm, to be worked for the profit of its 
 own inhabitants. But if the good of the governed is the proper business of a 
 government it is utterly impossible that a people should directly attend to it.” 
 Consequently the people of England devolve the power which they hold over 
 Ireland upon a succession of satraps, military and civil, who are quite irre¬ 
 sponsible and independent of any popular control, English or Irish, and repre- 
 
792 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 sent no interest of the Irish people. Recent events show that the essential 
 vices of the government are as active now as in former times. 
 
 (3) Because the English temper toward the cause of Irish national liberty 
 produces atrocious and intolerable results in Ireland. Among the results are 
 a depopulation unexampled in any other country however badly governed; 
 wholesale destruction of industries and commerce; overtaxation on an enormous 
 scale; diversion of rents, savings, and surplus incomes from Ireland to England ; 
 opposition to the utilization by the Irish people of the economic resources of 
 their country, and to economic development and social'improvement; exploita¬ 
 tion of Ireland for the benefit of English capitalists; fomentation of religious 
 animosities; repression of the national culture; maintenance of a monstrous 
 system of police rule, by which, in the words of an English minister, all 
 Ireland is kept “ under the microscope ”; perversion of justice by making 
 political service and political subservience almost the sole qualification for 
 judicial positions; by an elaborate corruption of the jury system by the organi¬ 
 zation of police espionage and perjury, and the encouragement of agents provo¬ 
 cateurs, and recently and at present by using for the purpose of political 
 oppression in Ireland the exceptional powers created for the purposes of the 
 European war. Under these powers military government is established, somo 
 areas being treated as hostile territory occupied in ordinary warfare; a war 
 censorship Is maintained over the press and over publications generally; 
 printing offices are invaded and dismantled; the police and military are em¬ 
 powered to confiscate the property of vendors of literature without any legal 
 process; persons are imprisoned without trial and deported from Ireland; Irish 
 regiments in the English army are removed from Ireland, and a large military 
 force, larger than at any previous time, with full equipment for modern war¬ 
 fare, has been maintained in Ireland; civilians are daily arrested and tried 
 by courts-martial and sentenced to long terms of imprisonment. 
 
 What are England’s objections to Ireland's independence? 
 
 The one objection in which English statesmen are sincere Is that which has 
 been already mentioned—that the domination of Ireland by England is neces¬ 
 sary for the security of England. Ireland, according to the English Navy 
 League, is “ the Heligoland of the Atlantic,” a naval outpost, to be governed 
 for the sole benefit of its foreign masters. This claim, if it is valid, justifies 
 not only the suppression of national liberty, but also the weakening of Ireland 
 by depopulation, repression of industry and commerce and culture, mainte¬ 
 nance of internal discord, etc. It can also be held to justify the subjugation of 
 any small nation by a neighboring great power. 
 
 The proximity of Ireland to England furnishes another plea. But Ireland 
 is not as near to England as Belgium, Holland, Denmark, etc., are to Germany, 
 Norway to Sweden, Portugal to Spain. In fact, it is this very proximity that 
 makes independence necessary for Ireland as the only condition of security 
 against the sacrifice of Irish rights to English interests. 
 
 A further plea is that England, being a maritime power, her safety depend¬ 
 ing on her navy and her prosperity depending on maritime commerce, the 
 domination of Ireland is for her a practical necessity—a plea involving that 
 Ireland’s natural harbors, the best in Europe, must be kept empty of mercan¬ 
 tile shipping, except for such shipping as carries on the restricted trade be¬ 
 tween Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 Ireland can not admit that the interests of one country, be they what they 
 may, can be allowed to annul the natural rights of another counry. If England’s 
 plea be admitted, then there is an end to national rights, and all the world must 
 prepare to submit to armed interests or to make war against them. 
 
 We may expect also to find the plea Insinuated, in some specious form if not 
 definitely and clearly made, that the English rule In Ireland has been and is 
 favorable to the peace, progress, and civilization of Ireland. We answer that, 
 on the contrary, English rule has never been for the benefit of Ireland and has 
 never been intended for the benefit of Ireland; that it has isolated Ireland 
 from Europe, prevented her development, and done everything in its power to 
 deprive her of a national civilization. So far as Ireland at present Is lacking 
 in internal peace, is behind other countries in education and material progress, 
 is unable to contribute notably to the common civilization of mankind, these 
 defects are the visible consequences of English intrusion and domination. 
 
 The Irish people have never believed in the sincerity of the public declarations 
 of English statesmen in regard to their “ war aims,” except in so far as those 
 declarations avowed England’s part in the war to have been undertaken for 
 England’s particular and imperial interests. They have never believed that 
 
TEEATY OF PEACE WITH GEEMANY. 
 
 793 
 
 England went to war for the sake of France or Belgium or Serbia, or for the 
 protection or liberation of small nationalists, or to make right prevail against 
 armed might. If English statesmen wish to be regarded as sincere they can 
 prove it to the world by adandoning, not in words but in act, the claim to 
 subordinate Ireland’s liberty to England’s security. 
 
 Ireland’s complete liberation must follow upon the application of President 
 Wilson’s principles. It has not resulted from the verbal acceptance of those 
 principles; and their rejection Is Implied In the refusal to recognize for Ireland 
 the right of self-determination. Among the principles declared by the Presi¬ 
 dent, before and since America entered the war, accepted by the American 
 people and adopted by the spokesmen of the chief allied powers, we cite the 
 following: 
 
 “No peace can rest securely on political or economic restrictions, meant 
 to benefit some nations and cripple or embarrass others.” “ Peace should 
 rest upon the rights of peoples, not on the rights of governments—the rights 
 of peoples, great and small, weak or powerful; their equal right to freedom 
 and security and self-government, and to participation, upon fair terms, 
 in the economic opportunities of the world.” “ What we demand in this war 
 is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe 
 to live in, and particular that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation, 
 which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institu¬ 
 tions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by other peoples of the world, 
 as against force and selfish aggression.” “An evident principle runs through 
 the whole of the program I have outlined. It is the principle of justice to 
 all peoples and nationalities, and their right to live on equal terms of liberty 
 and safety with one another, whether they be strong or weak. Unless this 
 principle be made the foundation, no part of the structure of international 
 justice can stand.” 
 
 Speaking on behalf of the American people at New York on the 27th of 
 September, 1918, President Wilson said: 
 
 “ We accepted the issues of the war as facts, not as any group of men 
 either here or elsewhere had defined them, and we can accept no outcome 
 which does not squarely meet and settle them. These issues are these: 
 
 * Shall the military power of any nation or group of nations be suffered to 
 
 determine the fortunes of peoples over whom they have no right to rule, 
 except the right of force? ’ ‘ Shall strong nations be free to wrong weak 
 
 nations and make them subject to their purpose and Interest? ’ ‘ Shall peoples 
 be ruled and dominated, even in their own internal affairs, by arbitrary 
 and irresponsible force, or by their own will and choice?’ ‘Shall there 
 be a common standard of right and privilege for all peoples and nations, 
 or shall the strong do as they will, and the weak suffer without redress?’ 
 
 * Shall the assertion of right be haphazard and by casual alliance, or shall 
 
 there be a common concert to oblige the observance of common rights?’ 
 No man, no group of men, chose these to be the issues of the struggle. They 
 are the issues of it, and they must be settled—by no arrangement or compromise 
 or adjustment of interests, but definitely and once for all, and with a full 
 and unequivocal acceptance of the principle that the interest of the weakest 
 is as safe as the interest of the strongest. * * * The impartial justice 
 
 meted out must involve no discrimination between those to whom we wish 
 to be just and those to whom we do not wish to be just. It must be a justice 
 that plays no favorites and knows no standards but the equal rights of the 
 several peoples concerned.” 
 
 If England objects to the application of those principles to the settlement of 
 the ancient quarrel between herself and Ireland, she thereby testifies: (1) That 
 her international policy is entirely based on her own selfish interest, not on the 
 recognition of rights in others, notwithstanding any professions to the contrary. 
 (2) That in her future dealings with other nations she may be expected, when the 
 opportunity arises, to use her power in order to make her own interest prevail 
 over their "rights. (3) That her particular object in keeping possession of Ire¬ 
 land is to secure naval and mercantile domination over the seas, and in particu¬ 
 lar over the North Atlantic and the nations which have legitimate maritime 
 interests therein; ruling Ireland at the same time on a plan of thoroughgoing ex¬ 
 ploitation for her own sole profit, to the great material detriment of Ireland, 
 and preventing the establishment of beneficial intercourse, through commerce 
 and otherwise, between Ireland and other countries. 
 
 It is evident that, while Ireland is denied the right to choose freely and es¬ 
 tablish that form of government which the Irish people desire, no international 
 
794 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 order can be founded on the basis of national right and international justice ; the 
 claim of the stronger to dominate the weaker will once more be successfully 
 asserted; and there will be no true peace. 
 
 It must be recognized that Ireland has already clearly demonstrated her will. 
 At the recent general election, out of 105 constituencies 73 returned republican 
 candidates, and 6 returned representatives who, though not republicans, will 
 not oppose the free exercise of self-determination by the Irish people. Nor Is 
 there the slightest likelihood that this right will at any time be relinquished. 
 
 The Irish people are thoroughly capable of taking immediate charge of their 
 national and international affairs, not less capable than any of the new States 
 which have been recognized since the beginning of the war, or which are about 
 to be recognized; and by a procedure not less valid than has been held good for 
 other restored or newly established States, they have already formally consti¬ 
 tuted a national government. 
 
 The effect on the world of the restoration of Ireland to the society of free 
 nations can not fail to be beneficial. On the part of the nations in general, this 
 fact will be a guarantee of the new international order and a reassurance to all 
 the smaller nations. On the part of England, if justice to Ireland be not 
 “ denied or sold or delayed,” the fact will be an earnest to other peoples, espe¬ 
 cially to those whose commerce is borne upon the Atlantic Ocean, that Eng¬ 
 land’s naval power is not hostile to the rights and legitimate interests of other 
 countries. 
 
 Ireland’s voice in the councils of the nations will be wholly in favor of peace 
 and justice. Ireland covets no possessions and makes no territorial claims 
 outside of her own well-defined geographical bounds. Her liberty can not 
 infringed on that of any other people. She will not make any war or aggression 
 or favor any. In remembrance of her unexampled progress and prosperity 
 during a brief period of legislative but not executive independence (1782-1798), 
 she looks forward confidently to the time when she will again be free to 
 contribute to the prosperity of all countries in commercial relation with her. 
 
 The longest agony suffered by any people in history will be ended, the oldest 
 standing enmity between two peoples will be removed. England will be 
 relieved of the disgrace she bears in the eyes of all peoples, a disgrace not less 
 evident to the remote Armenian than to her nearest continental neighbors. 
 
 In proportion as Engand gives earnest of disinterestedness and good will, 
 in like proportion shall Ireland show her readiness to join in with England 
 in allowing the past to pass into history. The international ambition of 
 Ireland will be to re-create in some new way that period of her ancient inde¬ 
 pendence of which she is proudest, when she gave freely of her greatest treas¬ 
 ures to every nation within her reach, and entertained no thought of recompense 
 or of selfish advantage. 
 
 Judge Coilalan. Mr. Chairman, I have the pleasure of presenting 
 to the committee Hon Frank T. Walsh, who went over to the other 
 side as the chairman of the American mission on Irish independ¬ 
 ence. He appeared before the Paris peace conference with his col¬ 
 leagues, Mr. Ryan, of Philadelphia, and Gov. Dunn, of Illinois, for 
 the purpose of demanding the appearance there of the chosen repre¬ 
 sentatives of Ireland, President De Valera, Arthur Griffith, and Count 
 Plunkett. The committee may remember that he was with President 
 Taft, the former joint chairman of the War Labor Board. I have 
 great pleasure in presenting to you Hon. Frank P. Walsh. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK P. WALSH. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, to 
 my mind the issue that is before the Senate and to which I have 
 tlie privilege of addressing myself this morning, transcends in im¬ 
 portance any issue that has ever been presented to us in our history 
 of nationhood. I do not except from that the great issues that 
 brought on the conflict between our own people, the question of 
 nullification, the question of black slavery, and the question of the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 795 
 
 right of secession, because I see in what is going on here a situation 
 of menace to us as a Nation—not as a power, but integral as a 
 Nation—such as we have never been confronted with before. 
 
 It was conceivable to the minds of the men who wrote our Con¬ 
 stitution that a situation might arise whereby a dictatorship might 
 be asserted in this country by some person who had secured the 
 favor of the people through the processes laid down in the Constitu¬ 
 tion of the United States. It was conceivable to them that men 
 might be weakened by flattery, that they might be carried away by 
 power and that, perhaps, especially in dealing with other nations of 
 different beliefs and different concepts, they might wander away 
 from the principles laid down in the Constitution of the United 
 States. And so I am profoundly thankful, and I say that on behalf 
 of those whom I represent, that this Senate Committee has given us 
 a hearing to-day. I am distressed to observe that there is not a 
 fuller attendance of Senators, and yet I feel that I should go on 
 with what I have to say notwithstanding, in the hope that as my 
 mind was brought to where I am to-day, perhaps the minds of 
 some of my fellow Democrats may be so brought, and that we may 
 be preserved from the calamity which I believe is about to overtake 
 us, if it be not checked by the Senate. Our forefathers, with that 
 in mind, provided specifically against one-man power in the dealing 
 with other nations. They provided that the President of the United 
 States had authority to make treaties only with the advice and con¬ 
 sent of the Senate, and then only when two-thirds of those present 
 concurred in the treaty. It is our hold, our democratic hold, on the 
 Constitution of the United States that I believe is going to save 
 us and save more than one-half of the world from being plunged 
 into wars such as have not been comparable in our history before, 
 and which will occur under any such proposition. We have now more 
 than one-half of the world in open rebellion against the other half 
 asserting repressive power, among which would be under the present 
 league of nations the Congress of the United States. So the people 
 of the world have been looking to this constitution, understanding 
 its strength and elasticity, and looking to the Senate to save them 
 from what they think will be the most calamitous event in the history 
 of the world. 
 
 Might I, without being thought to put a personal angle on what 
 I have to say, describe as briefly as I may how I am brought to 
 this conclusion, which I urge upon you. Although I am but one 
 humble citizen of this country, in appearing before you gentlemen 
 to plead the cause I do, I do so with a feeling of solemnity which 
 I have never before felt in any presence in my life. Perhaps what 
 I say about myself may in a small way reflect an angle on the public 
 mind, and it might give your committee perhaps some sort of idea 
 if I can make myself plain, of what goes to make up the composite 
 mind. Prior to our entry into this war I might have been described 
 as a pacifist. I know that this finally in its last analysis will not 
 be a political question. I know that when this matter is settled it 
 is going to be settled by honorable men from motives of the loftiest 
 patriotism. Our reactions may first be excused, primarily and initi¬ 
 ally, for running along party lines, because we are a party gov¬ 
 ernment, but in great questions, we stand together. That is evi¬ 
 denced by the support that the gentlemen in whose presence I have 
 
796 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 the honor to speak gave the President of the United States, a mem¬ 
 ber of my party, during the dark days when he needed support in 
 the bitter conflict which cost us so many precious lives and billions 
 of dollars of our treasure. I say this because I have always been a 
 Democrat, and I like to call myself an independent Democrat, and 
 I have supported every Democratic President since I reached my 
 majority. Prior to our entry into this war I was a believer in peace 
 to the point of being called a pacifist. 
 
 I believe I did think that I was a pacifist, but when brought face 
 to face with these questions I found, as we all found, that there 
 are so many tilings that we would fight for, there are so many things 
 that if physically brave enough we would die for, that the pacifist 
 so-called in this country was a negligible quantity. But I did have 
 that point of view to an extent that I was led to make something 
 like 78 speeches on the theme which the President of the United 
 States gave to us, that he kept us out of war, and I want to say to 
 you that throughout this land there was a great response to that 
 thought. On account of certain connections I have had in an official 
 way—I suppose for that reason—I was sent through the great 
 Hocking Valley of Ohio and Pennsylvania, the coal valley, and 
 practically with unanimity the people in that section responded to 
 the thought that we were traditionally opposed to war, that we were 
 historically opposed to entangling ourselves with any European em¬ 
 broilment and entanglements. But our country saw fit through the 
 regular processes to declare war, and I say that I speak the com¬ 
 posite mind of the people who despise war in this country when I 
 say that they sprang to the support of the Government because under 
 the written Constitution laid down by our forefathers they agreed 
 in honor to do so. They knew, the intelligent ones of them, that 
 when war was declared by this country the President of the United 
 States became the most powerful potentate upon the face of the 
 earth. They knew or thought they knew that he needed less legis¬ 
 lation in the freest country in the world to perform what was at 
 his hand, namely, to provide the means and opportunity for winning 
 this war, than did any man on the face of the earth, including the 
 late Emperor of Germany; and we did it purposely, gentlemen of 
 the committee—I believe our forefathers did—because it was thought 
 at that time that a democracy, a government founded upon Repub¬ 
 lican principles, could not stand against an autocracy where one 
 man had autocratic power, so it was provided, and wisely provided, 
 that along the paths of peace we should proceed as a democracy, 
 but that when war was declared we wanted all of the power, all 
 of the drive, all of the concentration that the most powerful po¬ 
 tentate on the face of the earth might have at that time. 
 
 So that we went into it without question. I believe that nothing 
 that was done by any man in this war was a sacrifice. I stood 
 among the 2,200 graves of those American citizens at the edge of 
 Belleau Wood,, with practically every name on every cross showing 
 the boy or the man was of Irish or German origin, because there 
 were many German names on those crosses, and I knew that even 
 they, fighting in this spirit as they did, would not say, if their voice¬ 
 less lips could speak, that they had made any sacrifice. They did 
 it willingly, cheerfully, for the confederation of human beings that 
 got together more than 150 years ago to declare that this was on8 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 797 
 
 Government that would never foster tyranny; that it was one Gov¬ 
 ernment that would always remain the refuge of the principles of 
 right, and that when it was threatened or that when its representa¬ 
 tives thought it was threatened, their answer could be but one thing, 
 to give up all they had, even life, for this Government. 
 
 I had the privilege to serve my Government for about a year, or 
 over a year, in a capacity that brought me quite in touch with what 
 might be called the masses of the people of this country. Consider¬ 
 ing industrial disputes involving something over 3,000,000 people, I 
 saw that that same spirit existed among the working people, what 
 we are pleased to call the masses, the common people of this country, 
 and that that same intelligent thought, even though perhaps they 
 could not define a section of the Constitution, actuated them, that 
 same spirit and genius, so that they w T ere just like the soldier who 
 went abroad. Therefore, when we threw the weight of our great 
 resources and our man power into the conflict, we obtained the re¬ 
 sults we did. I used the words “man power” as I do, although I 
 despise the words, because I know that man power is talked about 
 by the Governments of Europe as meaning only the skull and the 
 brains of such as my boy who sits yonder. It means the disem¬ 
 boweling of the human beings; it means throwing men and women 
 to their death by the words usually of one or two men. But that 
 was the name they gave to it, and so I use it. We threw into the 
 conflict the man power of this country and the matchless resources 
 that won this war. I say that, gentlemen of the committee, not 
 because strategically our soldiers made a fight that kept the enemy 
 from Paris, not because with a dash that at least was as great as 
 that of the most seasoned soldiers, they won a battle at certain points 
 and turned the tide. I do not mean that, but I mean that when 
 we threw in our mighty resources that war was won'. We have 
 enough gained to pay off the war in one year’s productivity. We 
 have enough now, according to Government figures, to pay the whole 
 cost of the war in the increased value of our productivity since 1914; 
 so that if a country marches on its stomach and wins by the last 
 pound of wheat or the last pound of meat, when we went in, we 
 won this war. 
 
 In addition to being opposed to war—and I want to say that my 
 opposition was strengthened by walking through those devastated 
 fields in France—I want to add one other thought. No man could 
 see the bleaching bones of his own kindred, no man could look at 
 those rough brogans still with the flesh and blood in them of the liv¬ 
 ing men who walked in them a few months ago, and not despise war 
 with all his heart. I was a believer likewise in a league of nations. 
 I profoundly believed in a league of nations. I took my concep¬ 
 tion of a league of nations from what our great President has said, 
 and I want to say at this moment again, according him very great 
 respect for his great ability and for the work that he has done for 
 this country up until this time, that the best friend that he has in 
 the United States is the man who will stand up and preserve him 
 from the wreck of the great mistake that he seems about to make 
 after coming from Paris. 
 
 I followed his concept, and I was and am in favor of that 
 much-talked-of thing, a league of nations, a league of nations that 
 will let every nation upon the earth take part in it, to begin with 
 
798 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 national disarmament, the absolute freedom of the seas, and the 
 much-talked-of open covenants openly arrived at, and the abolition 
 of secret treaties. It was not an ideal thing. I say that it was the 
 whole basis of any league of nations that would prove effective. It 
 was the parting of the ways between secret diplomacy, and open 
 covenants that a free people could understand and act upon intel¬ 
 ligently, as I know you are trying to act upon this question to-day. 
 I believed that such a league of nations was possible, and I so 
 abhorred war that I gave what strength I had to the formation 
 of such a league. Having been a humble member'of the League to 
 Enforce Peace, after the armistice was signed I accepted a position 
 upon the executive committee of that body, and took part in the 
 nation-wide tour for a league of nations. 
 
 Senator Boraii. Did you travel with Mr. Taft for a while? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I did. I traveled as far as Chicago with him. 
 From there I went to St. Louis and he went in another direction, 
 and I will say that I was in accord with Mr. Taft and Dr. Lowell 
 and others who spoke with him upon this general proposition, and 
 I believe at heart if I understand them I am in accord with them 
 to-day; and perhaps if I can get to it as I hurry through I mav 
 show the point of departure, and hope that the rest of them will 
 depart at the same point. [Applause.] 
 
 It was thrown in my way to go to Paris. I might say here, al¬ 
 though it is nothing to be proud of or to be ashamed of, that I 
 have not given as much attention to the so-called Irish question 
 that formerly existed as some of these gentlemen have who appear 
 with me here to-day. I was not a member of any society that had 
 for its object help to Ireland, but I was called into this by the 
 gentlemen who organized the Irish race convention. My ancestry 
 was Irish, every bit of it. This appeals to me as an American 
 proposition. It occurred to me that if the case of Ireland so 
 splendidly described by the President of the United States could 
 be given to the world, if it could be understood that that was what 
 we fought for, the greatest advance could be made by our country, 
 and the greatest evidence could be given of our entire good faith 
 in this enormous and awesome enterprise upon which we had 
 entered, so that I went in as the representative and as the chairman 
 of the committee of the American Commission on Irish Independ¬ 
 ence from the Irish race convention. We have here, gentlemen of 
 the committee, and have given you a copy of, all the correspondence 
 that we had with all persons while in Paris. We have given you a 
 splendid copy of the report on conditions in Ireland. We have 
 addressed a letter to your honorable chairman, a copy of which 
 is on the first page of the brown-covered pamphlet in which we 
 have embodied this correspondence. In addition to that we had 
 interviews with every member of the American Commission to 
 Negotiate Peace. Some of them we believe to be very significant, 
 and we wanted to give the full text of those interviews in an 
 executive session of this committee, because I believed there were 
 matters in it that ought not to be made public, that would be 
 embarrassing to some gentlemen if they were made public, but we 
 will offer them to an executive meeting of this committee or to 
 the Senate of the United States, if called upon. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 799 
 
 Senator Moses. Mr. Chairman, I move that these communications 
 be received and printed as a confidential committee document. 
 
 The Chairman. If there be no objection it will be so ordered. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. We w T ere sent to Paris and we went there with the 
 commission of these 5,132 men and women, with this idea. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. Just a moment, Mr. Walsh. 
 
 The Chairman. The Senator from California. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. I want to suggest to you, Mr. 
 Chairman, that the hearings of this committee have all been open. 
 We have endeavored to make a departure from the rules that liavo 
 prevailed heretofore, and to act in the open; to observe one of the 
 14 points, that of open covenants of peace openly arrived at. 
 
 I think these communications, if printed, ought to be open to the 
 public as well as to the United States Senate. (Applause.) I want 
 to amend the motion made by the Senator from New Hampshire 
 (Mr. Moses) or to substitute for it the motion that the communi¬ 
 cations be received, be accepted, and be printed as a part of our 
 record of the proceedings. 
 
 Senator Moses. I accept that substitute, Mr. Chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. The question is on the substitute. 
 
 Senator Boraii. What are these communications? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. The communications are the interviews which we had 
 with the members of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 including the President. 
 
 Senator Fall. Mr. Chairman, this commission waited upon the 
 President of the United States and there declined to receive from 
 him any confidential information which they could not impart to 
 the people of the United States. If the committee could not con¬ 
 scientiously receive information of that character from the Presi¬ 
 dent of the United States—and I was one who would not have at¬ 
 tended the conference had it not been open, I must decline—and I 
 had intended to so state later—to keep anything confidential from 
 the people of the United States which it is their business to know. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Mr. Chairman, I submit that this matter ought 
 to come later, because it was understood that we would have nothing 
 but hearings this morning. 
 
 Senator Fall. This is a part of the hearing, Mr. Chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. The question is on the motion for the printing 
 of these documents. 
 
 Senator Fall. That will leave them at liberty to present them 
 under those conditions, if they desire to do so. 
 
 The Chairman. If they are submitted, I think they ought to be 
 published as a part of the record. 
 
 Senator Fall. I simply wanted to serve notice that I would nor 
 regard the information as confidential if it was submitted. 
 
 Senator Knox. Put the question. 
 
 The Chairman. The question is, shall these documents referred 
 to by Mr. Walsh be printed as a part of the record, as submitted 
 by him. 
 
 (The question was taken and the motion was agreed to.) 
 
 (Other documents referred to are here printed in full, as follows:) 
 
800 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 Correspondence in Case of Ireland's Claim for Independence Between 
 American Commission on Irish Independence—American Commission to 
 Negotiate Peace and Representatives of Other Governments. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Office of Chairman, 
 
 211/2 Woolworth Building, August 26, 1919. 
 
 Uml IIenry Cabot Lodge, 
 
 Chairman Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 D^ar Sir : We beg to hand yon herewith, for consideration of your honorable 
 committee, copies of all corrspondence between the American *Commision ou 
 Irish independence, the American Commission to negotiate Peace, and the rep¬ 
 resentatives of other Governments, at Paris, between the dates of April 1G, 1919, 
 and June 27, 1919, inclusive. 
 
 We likewise beg leave to inform your honorable body that, in addition to this 
 correspondence, we had personal interviews with all of the members of the 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace. 
 
 Immediately at the close of such interviews, the substance of the same were 
 dictated to stenographers, and full transcripts of the important ones preserved. 
 
 On account of the subject matter of certain of them, we do not consider it 
 proper to offer the same at a pubiic hearing. If your honorable body desires 
 the information, however, we shall be glad to submit the full text of the inter¬ 
 views to you la executive session. 
 
 With assuranpa of our high respect and esteem, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 Michael J. Ryan, 
 
 Edward F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Hotel Grand, 
 
 Paris, France, April 16, 1919. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Parts. 
 
 Dear Mb. President: We beg to advise you that in pursuance of the commis¬ 
 sion given us by the Irish race convention held in the city of Philadelphia on 
 February 22, 1919, we were, amoog other things, instructed to obtain, if pos¬ 
 sible, for the delegates selected by the people of Ireland, a hearing at the peace 
 conference. 
 
 The delegates so selected are Messrs Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and 
 Count Plunkett. 
 
 If these gentlemen were furnished safe conduct to Paris so that they might 
 present their case, we feel that our mission would be, in the main if not 
 entirely, accomplished. 
 
 May we therefore ask you to obtain from Mr. Lloyd George, or whomsoever 
 may be Intrusted with the specific details of such matters by the English Gov¬ 
 ernment, safe conduct for Messrs, de Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett from Dublin 
 to Paris. 
 
 If you could see your way clear to do this, we feel sure that it would meet 
 with the grateful appreciation of many millions of our fellow citizens, would 
 certainly facilitate the object of our mission, and place us under additional 
 great and lasting obligation to you. 
 
 It would afford us the utmost pleasure to call upon you In person in order 
 that we might pay our respects as well as make a brief suggestion as to the 
 
 subject matter of this letter, provided such course meets with your approval 
 and convenience. 
 
 With assurances of our continued high consideration and esteem, as always. 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 Michael J. Ryan. 
 
 Edward F. Dunne. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 801 
 
 The President of the United States of America, 
 
 Grand Hotel, 
 Paris, April 17, 191b. 
 
 Mr 
 
 letter 
 
 Unis, 
 
 Mr. 
 
 Dear Mr. Walsh : The President asks me to say, in reply to your recent 
 that he would be very glad to see you at his residence, 11 Place des Etats 
 at 5.30 o’clock this afternoon, Thursday. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, raris. 
 
 American Commission of Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, 
 Parts, May 17, 1919. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State and American Commissioner to Negotiate Peace. 
 
 Sir: On behalf of and representing the Irish race convention held in Phila¬ 
 delphia on February 22, 3919, we very respectfully request your good offices 
 to procure from the British Government a safe conduct from Dublin to Paris 
 and return for Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and George Noble Count 
 Plunkett, the elected representatives of the people of Ireland, so that they may 
 in person present the claims of Ireland for international recognition as a 
 republic to the peace conference. 
 
 As you know, the British Government assented to our going to Ireland; we 
 went there for the purpose of conferring with the representatives of the Irish 
 people and ascertaining for ourselves at first hand the conditions prevailing 
 in that country. We have returned therefrom and are now more desirous than 
 ever that the authorized representatives of Ireland shall be given the oppor¬ 
 tunity to appear and present the case of that country to the representatives 
 of the assembled nations. 
 
 Awaiting the favor of an early reply, we remain, 
 
 Very truly, yours, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 Edward F. Dunne. 
 Michael J. Ryan. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Suite 760, Grand Hotel, 
 
 Paris, May 20, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President : Following the interview courteously accorded by you to 
 the chairman of our delegation on the 17th ultimo, Col. House made the follow¬ 
 ing request of Mr. Lloyd-George: 
 
 “ That safe conduct be given by the Government of Great Britain from Dublin 
 to Paris and return for Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and George Noble 
 Count Plunkett, the representatives selected by the people of Ireland to present 
 its case to the peace conference.” 
 
 Upon the day following Col. House conveyed the information to us that Mr. 
 Lloyd-George was willing to comply with such request, but desired an interview 
 with the American delegates before doing so, and that it was the desire of Mr. 
 Lloyd-George that arrangements for the meeting with him be made through 
 Mr. Philip Kerr, private secretary to Mr. Lloyd-George. 
 
 After two tentative dates had been set by Mr. Kerr for the meeting with 
 Mr. Lloyd-George, and not yet having met him, we were advised by Col. House 
 to repeat our original request in writing to the honorable Secretary of State, 
 Mr. Robert Lansing, which we did upon the 17th instant. 
 
 At this moment we have been informed by the private secretary of Mr. 
 Secretary Lansing that our request has been referred to you. 
 
 May we not therefore respectfully ask of you that the undersigned, our full 
 delegation, be given an opportunity to present to you in person in as brief 
 manner as consistent with the importance of the case suggestions which Messrs, 
 de Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett, the representatives aforesaid, have asked us 
 to convey to you, together with certain facts of grave import now In our 
 possession. 
 
802 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 May we also take the liberty of suggesting, in view of existing conditions In 
 Ireland (which can not and will not be denied), that to foreclose its case by 
 refusing a hearing to its representatives at this time would be disconsonant 
 with the declared purpose for which the war was prosecuted and out of harmony 
 with the common principles of democracy. 
 
 We would gratefully appreciate a response at your convenience, and with 
 assurances of our continued high regard. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 Edward F. Dunne. 
 
 Michael J. Ryan. 
 
 To the President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, 21 May, 1919. 
 
 My Dear Mr. Walsh : The President asks me to acknowledge the receipt of 
 the letter of May 20 signed by yourself, Gov. Dunne, and Mr. Ryan and to 
 say that he has taken the matter up with the Secretary of State, and that by 
 the President’s direction, Mr. Lansing will reply to it. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 lion. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Suite 7 60, Grand Hotel, PaHs. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris, May 22, 1919. 
 
 The original of the following letter was to-day handed to M. Clemenceau’s 
 secretary at the foreign office, Quai d’Orsay, Paris, by Sean T. O’Ceallaigh, 
 envoy of the Irish republican government at Paris, and copies were handed 
 personally by Mr. Frank P. Walsh, chairman of the American Commission on 
 Irish Independence, to President Wilson, Col. House, Secretary of State Lan¬ 
 sing, Mr. White, and Gen. Bliss, the members of the American Commission to 
 Negotiate Peace: 
 
 “ Mansion House, Dublin, May 17, 1919. 
 
 “ To M. Clemenceau, 
 
 “ President of the Peace Conference of Paris. 
 
 “ Sir : The treaties now under discussion by the conference of Paris will, 
 presumably, be signed by the British plenipotentiaries claiming to act on behalf 
 of Ireland as well as of Great Britain. 
 
 “ Therefore we must ask you to call the immediate attention of the peace 
 conference to the warning which it is our duty to communicate, that the people 
 of Ireland, through all its organic means of declaration, has repudiated and 
 does now repudiate the claim of the British Government to speak or act on 
 behalf of Ireland, and consequently that no treaty or agreement entered into 
 by the representatives of the British Government in virtue of that claim is or 
 can be binding on the people of Ireland. 
 
 “ The Irish people will scrupulously observe any treaty obligation to which 
 they are legitimately committed; but the British delegates can not commit 
 Ireland. The only signatures by which the Irish nation will be bound are 
 those of its own delegates deliberately chosen. 
 
 “We request you to notify the peace conference that we the undersigned 
 have been appointed and authorized by the duly elected national government 
 of Ireland to act on behalf of Ireland in the proceedings of the conference and 
 to enter into agreements and sign treaties on behalf of Ireland. 
 
 “ Accept, sir, the assurance of our high esteem, 
 
 “ Eamon de Valera, 
 
 “ Arthur Griffith, 
 
 “ Count George Noble Plunkett.” 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 803 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris, May 22, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President : The following communication has this day been trans¬ 
 mitted to M. Clemenceau, president of the peace conference: 
 
 “Mansion House, Dublin, May 17, 1919. 
 
 “ To M. Clemenceau, 
 
 “President of the Peace Conference of Paris. 
 
 “ Sir : The treaties now under discussion by the conference of Paris will, pre¬ 
 sumably, be signed by the British plenipotentiaries claiming to act on behalf 
 of Ireland as well as of Great Britain. 
 
 “ Therefore we must ask you to call the immediate attention of the peace 
 conference to the warning which it is our duty to communicate, that the people 
 of Ireland, through all its organic means of declaration, has repudiated and 
 does now repudiate the claim of the British Government to speak or act on 
 behalf of Ireland, and consequently that no treaty or agreement entered into 
 by the representatives of the British Government in virtue of that claim is or 
 can be binding on the people of Ireland. 
 
 “ The Irish people will scrupulously observe any treaty obligation to which 
 they are legitimately committed; but the British delegates can not commit Ire¬ 
 land. The only signatures by which the Irish Nation will be bound are those 
 of its own delegates deliberately chosen. 
 
 “ We request you to notify the peace conference that we the undersigned have 
 been appointed and authorized by the duly elected national government of 
 Irland to act on behalf of Ireland in the proceedings of the conference and to 
 enter into agreements and sign treaties on behalf of Ireland. 
 
 “ Accept, sir, the assurance of our high esteem. 
 
 “(Signed) Eamon de Valera, 
 
 “(Signed) Arthur Griffith, 
 
 “(Signed) Count George Noble Plunkett.” 
 
 At .the suggesion of President de Valera, we desire to call the same to your 
 attention. We trust that the justice of the demand from the standpoint of de¬ 
 mocracy as well as of fundamental human rights, may lead you to throw the 
 weight of your influence in its favor. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 Edward T.' Dunn, 
 
 Michael J. Byan. 
 
 To the President of the United States. 
 
 Commissioner Plenipotentiary of the 
 
 United States of America, 
 
 Paris, May 22, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. Walsh : I have duly received the letter dated the 22d which you 
 have been so good as to write me. 
 
 Yours, sincerely, 
 
 (Signed) Henry White. 
 
 Hon. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Hotel de Crillon, Paris, May 24, 1919. 
 
 Sir: I have received the letter which you and Messrs. Dunne and Ryan 
 addressed to me on May 16th regarding the issuing of safe-conducts by the 
 British Government to Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and George Noble 
 Count Plunkett, in order that they may proceed from Ireland to France and 
 return, and I immediately took steps to acquaint myself with the facts of the 
 case, which transpired before the matter was brought to my attention by your 
 above-mentioned letter. 
 
 I am informed that when the question of approaching the British authorities 
 with a view to procuring the safe-conducts in question was first considered 
 every effort was made, in an informal way, to bring you into friendly touch 
 with the British representatives here, although owing to the nature of the 
 case it was not possible to treat the matter officially. The British authorities 
 having consented that you and your colleagues should visit England and Ireland, 
 
 135549°—19-4 
 
804 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 although your passports were only good for France, every facility was given 
 to you to make the journey. Before your return to Paris, however, reports 
 were received of certain utterances made by you and your colleagues during 
 your visit to Ireland. These utterances, whatever they may have been, gave, 
 as I am informed, the deepest offense to those persons with whom you were 
 seeking to deal, and consequently it seemed useless to make any further 
 effort in connection with the request which you desired to make. In view of 
 the situation thus created, I regret to inform you that the American representa¬ 
 tives feel that any further efforts on their part connected with this matter 
 would be futile and therefore unwise. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 Robert Lansing. 
 
 Hon. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 Note. —This letter was received subsequent to the dispatch of our letter of 
 May 26, 1919. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris, May 26, 1919. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State and American Commissioner to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 Sir: Upon the 17th instant we had the honor to hand to your private secre¬ 
 tary, for immediate transmission to you, a letter requesting your good offices 
 to procure from the British Government safe conduct from Dublin to Paris 
 and return for Hons. Earnon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and Count George 
 Noble Plunkett, representatives of the people of Ireland, copy of which letter we 
 inclose to you herewith. 
 
 Upon the day following wq were advised by the American press representa¬ 
 tives that you had communicated to them the fact that you had referred the 
 letter to the President of the United States. Later in the day this statement 
 was confirmed by your secretary in an interview’ with our chairman. 
 
 With this information, upon the 20th instant we addressed a letter of the 
 same purport to the President of the United States, and requesting a hearing 
 by him. We also inclose copy of this letter to you herewith. 
 
 Upon the 21st instant we were advised by Mr. Gilbert F. Close, confidential 
 secretary to the President, that at the President’s direction you would make 
 reply to such letter. We have not been advised of further action, if any, 
 either by yourself or the President, upon our request. 
 
 In view of the urgency and importance of the matter, the arrangements 
 which must necessarily be made by President de Valera and his associates as 
 an outcome of your reply, as well as the further steps which we may be called 
 upon to take in an endeavor to accomplish the objects of our mission, may 
 we not ask that you be good enough to give us an answer to our request 
 
 With assurances of our high regard, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 By Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris, May 27, 1910. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State and American Commissioner to Negotiate Peace, Pams. 
 
 Sir : Your letter of the 24th instant conveying the refusal of the American 
 Commission to Negotiate Peace to our request that they should use their good 
 offices to secure the issuance of safe conducts by the British Government to 
 Hons. Earnon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and George Noble Count Plunkett, 
 was duly received. 
 
 Your letter states that you have been informed that every effort w r as made, 
 unofficially, to bring us into friendly touch with the British representatives in 
 Paris. It is also stated in your letter that you have information to the effect 
 that certain utterances of ours made during our visit to Ireland “ gave the deep¬ 
 est offense to certain persons with whom you (we) were seeking to deal.” 
 
 We beg to advise you that no person w r as authorized by us to make any effort 
 to bring us into friendly touch with any British representatives, here or else¬ 
 where. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 805 
 
 We also beg to further advise you that at no time, in Paris, or elsewhere, 
 have we sought to deal, privately or unofficially, with any persons relative to 
 the purposes of our mission. 
 
 In order to make the record perfectly clear, we submit the following: 
 
 On March 27, 1919, a letter in form following was delivered in person by 
 the undersigned to the Acting Secretary of State, in your absence, at your office 
 in Washington: 
 
 “Paris, March 27, 101D. 
 
 “ Hon. Frank L. Polk, 
 
 Acting Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. 
 
 “Dear Sir: We respectively request the issuance of passports to France to 
 Frank P. Walsh, of New York, N. Y.; Michael ,T. Ryan, of Philadelphia, Pa.; 
 and Edward F. Dunne, of Chicago, 111., who have been appointed by the recent 
 Irish race convention held in the city of Philadelphia, Pa., on February 22 and 
 23, 1919, and whose object in visiting France is to obtain for the delegates, 
 selected by the people of Ireland a hearing at the peace conference, and to 
 Diace before the conference, if that hearing be not given, the case of Ireland; 
 her insistence upon her right of self-determination; and to international recog¬ 
 nition of the republican form of government established by her people. 
 
 “ Very respectfully, 
 
 “ Frank P. Walsh, Chairman ” 
 
 We were informed by Mr. Assistant Secretary Phillips that he was acting 
 for you, in your absence, and that the request contained in the letter would 
 receive careful consideration. After a lapse of two days Mr. Assistant Secretary 
 Phillips informed Mr. Patrick Lee, our secretary, that the request contained 
 in the letter had been granted, and that your office had ordered the passports 
 issued, which was accordingly done. 
 
 Upon our arrival in Paris a communication was addressed to the President, 
 signed by Messrs. Walsh, Dunne, and Ryan, the full commission, advising 
 him that we were acting in pursuance of a commission given us by the Irish 
 Race Convention held in Philadelphia on February 22, 1919, and that we were 
 instructed by said convention to obtain, if possible, for the delegates selected 
 by the people of Ireland a hearing at the peace conference, and containing 
 the following specific request: 
 
 “ May we, therefore, ask you to obtain from Mr. Lloyd-George, or whomso¬ 
 ever may be intrusted with the specific details of such matters by the English 
 Government, safe conduct for Messrs, de Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett from 
 Dublin to Paris/* 
 
 Following an interview' between the President and the chairman of our 
 delegation, the matter was taken up with Col. E. M. House, and the identical 
 request wms made through him. 
 
 The implications of your letter that any person was acting unofficially, 
 privately, or secretly, is therefore erroneous. 
 
 Attempted negotiations on behalf of Ireland in such fashion would not only 
 be violative of our instructions but obnoxious to the principle, to which the 
 steadfastly adhere with multitudes of our fellow’’ citizens, that a just and per¬ 
 manent peace can only he secured through open conventions openly arrived at. 
 
 For the verity of the record, which w r e are anxious to maintain upon this 
 Important matter, will you be good enough to give us the names of the persons 
 to wffiom w r e gave deep offense by our utterances in Ireland, and with whom you 
 have been informed we “were seeking to deal,” as well as the name or names 
 of any person or persons who assumed to negotiate or promote any such secret 
 or unofficial dealings upon our behalf? 
 
 We likewise deem it proper to call your attention at this time to the fact 
 that w’e scrupulously refrained from any public utterances in England, and 
 that our statements to the people of Ireland as to the objects of our mission 
 were in strict conformity with the purposes stated to you in our written 
 application for passports and cherished and advocated by American citizens 
 since the foundation of the American Republic. We are confident that, if your 
 information is correct to the effect that our utterances gave deep offense, such 
 offense was not given to the Irish people or to their duly elected representa¬ 
 tives, in whose presence the utterances w r ere made. 
 
 Awaiting your further advices, we are, sir, 
 
 Respectfully and sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 By Frank I*. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 Note. —This letter was never answered. 
 
806 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, May 27, 1919. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We inclose herewith copy of letter received last 
 evening from Mr. Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, together with copy of 
 reply thereto of even date. We submit this so that you may be fully advised 
 pending one further effort to carry out the purposes of our mission. 
 
 With assurances of our high esteem and respect, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 By Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 (Same letter sent to Messrs. White, Bliss, and House.) 
 
 Commissioner Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, 
 
 Paris, May 28, 1919. 
 
 Dear Sir : I am in receipt of your letter of the 27th instant and hasten to in¬ 
 form you, in reply, that I have neither made nor associated myself in any way 
 with efforts to bring you and your colleagues into touch with the representa¬ 
 tives of the British Government in Paris or elsewhere, nor had I, until within 
 the last few days, any knowledge of those efforts. 
 
 You, yourselves, have not at any time approached me in the matter, nor was 
 I aware, until quite recently, of the informal action to which yo urefer. 
 
 I may add that I was equally unaware, until a few days ago, of the com¬ 
 munication which you addressed to the President upon your arrival in Paris 
 from the United States. 
 
 I must, therefore, both personally and as a member of the American Com¬ 
 mission to Negotiate Peace with Germany and Austria, decline all responsi¬ 
 bility in connection with the outcome of your mission. 
 
 Yours, sincerely, 
 
 Henry White. 
 
 Hon. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, May 28, 1919. 
 
 Hon. Henry White, 
 
 Commissioner Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, Paris. 
 
 Dear Sir: Please accept our thanks for your prompt and courteous response 
 to our letter of the 27th instant, just received. 
 
 With assurance of our appreciation and respect, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 By Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, May 28, 1919. 
 
 To the President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Dear Mr. President : We have the honor to transmit to you herewith a large 
 number of cablegrams from different parts of the United States, insisting upon 
 the securing of opportunity to present Ireland’s case to the peace conference, 
 and protesting against article 10 of the covenant of the league of nations. We 
 trust that you will find time, even with your multiplicity of duties, to give the 
 same careful consideration. 
 
 May we also take the opportunity to suggest that the fears of these peti¬ 
 tioners as to the effect of article 10, if adopted, seem to have a very substantial 
 basis of fact and reason. It occurs to us, as it doubtless has to them, that the 
 following evil effects might flow from the inclusion of article 10 in its present 
 form: 
 
 1. That nations and peoples claiming age-old territorial integrities of their 
 own would, ipso facto, be forced under the authority of other nations or even 
 kingdoms, without a hearing. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 807 
 
 2. That peoples, the vast majority of whom are devoted to the principles of 
 free governments such as our own, could be forced under the rule of monar¬ 
 chies or military autocracies. 
 
 3. That the signatories, including our country, would be bound, after the 
 adoption of article 10, to prevent the giving of aid by outside advocates of 
 liberty to oppressed nations, which practice has obtained among civilized 
 peoples from time immemorial. 
 
 4. That the powerful signatories, including our country, might eventually be 
 compelled to wage war, for the preservation of “ territorial integrity,” no 
 matter how unjust and oppressive in any part of the world. 
 
 In view of the refusal to give the representatives of the Irish people a 
 hearing in Paris, and without consulting with them upon this particular sub¬ 
 ject, may we not offer the suggestions following, which might apply to the 
 case of Ireland and other nations under like disabilities and similarly situated: 
 
 First. Before final adoption of article 10 that a full and open hearing 
 before the committee of four of the great powers at the peace conference be 
 accorded to any nation or people, in order that they may present any ques¬ 
 tions of fact which they may desire to submit to prove their own territorial 
 integrity, or to dispute the claim of any nation claiming territory to which 
 it is not entitled, or is, at the time of the signing thereof, attempting to 
 acquire or hold by force of arms. 
 
 Second. That in any event article 10 of the covenant of the league of nations 
 should be amended so as to read: 
 
 “ The members of the league undertake to respect and preserve as against 
 external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political inde¬ 
 pendence of all members of the league. In case of any such aggression or 
 in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the council shall advise 
 upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled: Provided, however, 
 That the territorial boundaries of no country at the signing of the covenant 
 shall be deemed to include any other country or nation the boundaries of 
 which are natural ones, or clearly defined, inhabited by a homogeneous people, 
 a majority of whom by a vote of its electorate has determined the form 
 of government under which they desire to live, and whose efforts to establish 
 the same and function thereunder are at the time of the signing hereof pre¬ 
 vented by an army of occupation or other form of forcible repression.” 
 
 With assurances of our continued high regard, we remain, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 By Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 (Copies of the above letter and cablegrams sent to Messrs. House, White, 
 Bliss, and Lansing.) 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, May 28, 1819. 
 
 My Dear Mr. Walsh : I am writing on behalf of the President to acknowl¬ 
 edge receipt of your letter of May 17 inclosing a copy of your letter to the 
 Secretary of State of May 27. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 Hon. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, May 29, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr; Walsii : Thank you for your note of May 27 inclosing for my 
 information a copy of your recent correspondence with the Secretary of State 
 regarding the issuance of safe conducts for Messrs, de Valera, Griffith, and 
 Count Plunkett. 
 
 Cordially, yours, 
 
 E. M. House. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Chairman, American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
803 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, May 29, 19I'D. 
 
 Dear Sir: As representatives of the Irish race convention held in the city 
 of Philadelphia on February 22, 1919, we respectfully request an opportunity 
 of appearing before the members of the American Commission to Negotiate 
 Peace at as early a moment as may be convenient and meet with the pleasure 
 of the commissioners plenipotentiary. 
 
 With assurances of our respect and high regard, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Mr. J. C. Grew, 
 
 Secretary to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Pans, May 29, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We inclose you herewith copy of letter this day ad¬ 
 dressed to the secretary of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace. 
 
 We were informed by Col. House that daily meetings of the commissioners 
 plenipotentiary are held at the Hotel Crillon, and he was good enough to say 
 that he would be glad to attend at any time an opportunity was given us for 
 a hearing. 
 
 We called at the headquarters of the commission at tlieir regular meeting 
 hour this morning, but their meeting had adjourned. Mr. Secretary of State 
 Lansing therefore suggested to us, through his private secretary, that we 
 make this request through the secretary of the commission. 
 
 We wish you to be assured that we will occupy but a brief space of time, 
 and indulge the hope that you may accord us this hearing at as early a 
 moment as will meet with your pleasure and convenience, considering your 
 other important duties. 
 
 With assurances of our great respect, we are. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 (Letters of similar purport were sent to Messrs. Lansing, White, House, 
 and Bliss.) 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, May SI, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President : We beg to advise you that, in pursuance of the commis¬ 
 sion given us by the Irish race convention held In the city of Philadelphia on 
 February 22, 1919, and following our letter to you of April 16, 1919, every 
 effort has been made to obtain a bearing for the delegates selected by the 
 people of Ireland to represent them at the peace conference. Our information 
 is that the government of Great Britain has definitely denied safe conducts to 
 these representatives, and hence they can not appear before the peace confer¬ 
 ence or any committee thereof. 
 
 The resolutions and instructions under which we are acting provide that, if 
 opportunity be not given the regularly chosen representatives of Ireland, we 
 should ourselves present her case; her insistence upon her right of self-deter¬ 
 mination; and to international recognition of the republican form of govern¬ 
 ment established by her people. 
 
 We therefore petition you to use your good offices to secure a hearing for us 
 before the special committee of the four great powers, so that we may dis¬ 
 charge the duty imposed upon us by our convention. 
 
 In order to avoid misunderstanding we desire to state, and would thank 
 you to convey the information to the other members of your committee, that 
 we do not hold, or claim to have, any commission or authority from the people 
 of Ireland or their representatives; but desire solely and respectfully to pre¬ 
 sent the resolutions of the American convention with a brief argument in 
 support thereof. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 809 
 
 May we also point out that while the convention which we represent was 
 unofficial, and while we claim no official authority in the governmental souse, 
 nevertheless, it was a convention composed of 5,132 delegates; democratically 
 selected, representing every State in the American Union; and the individuals 
 who composed it may fairly be said to have been men and women of all shades 
 of political opinion, of all religious sects, and of practically every trade, pro¬ 
 fession, and avocation which go to make up our national life. 
 
 We think it is likewise fair to state that this convention acted for many 
 millions of our fellow-citizens, who, in this representative way, respectfully 
 urge you to give favorable response to the request of this petition. 
 
 We will deeply appreciate it if you will be good enough to give us an early 
 reply to this letter, as the matter of our departure for home is pressing us. 
 
 With considerations of our continued great respect and esteem, we are, 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman , 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 To the President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris , May 31, 1010. 
 
 Gentlemen : I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 29, requesting, 
 as representatives of the Irish race convention held in the city of Philadelphia 
 on February 22, 1919, an opportunity of appearing before the members of the 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace at as early a moment as may be con¬ 
 venient and meet with the pleasure of the commissioners plenipotentiary. 
 
 The commission is led to believe that your object in requesting to be received 
 is to ask its good offices to obtain a hearing before the peace conference of rep¬ 
 resentatives of the so-called “ Irish republic.” On the basis of this understand¬ 
 ing, I am instructed by the American commissioners to express to you their 
 regrets that they are unable to comply with your request, for the reason that 
 it is not within the province of the American delegation to request the peace 
 conference to receive a delegation composed of citizens of a country other than 
 our own, when that country is officially represented at the conference, in regard 
 to a matter having no relation whatever to the making of peace with Germany 
 and Austria. 
 
 With assurance of respect, I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant, 
 
 J. G. Grew, Secretary General. 
 
 Messrs. Frank P. Walsh and E. F. Dunne, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, May 31, 1910. 
 
 My Dear Mr. Walsh : I am writing on behalf of the President to acknowledge 
 receipt of your letter of May 28 with the inclosed telegrams and to say that I 
 am bringing them to the President’s attention. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 • Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Paris, June 2, 1010. 
 
 My Dear Mr. Close: I am handing you herewith letter for delivery to the 
 President, which is quite urgent as to time. Would appreciate it deeply if you 
 would get it to his hand at the earliest opportunity. 
 
 Thanking you for all of your kindnesses, 1 am, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh. 
 
 Mr. Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President, Paris, 
 
810 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Pans, June 2, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: Upon this morning Mr. J. C. Grew, secretary general 
 to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, handed Gov. Dunne and my¬ 
 self a letter, copy of which is inclosed to you herewith. He stated at the same 
 time that you were willing to accord personal interviews to us. 
 
 I am deeply appreciative of the courtesy extended, and would be grateful if 
 you will be good enough to indicate at as early a moment as possible, consistent 
 with your great press of affairs, when I might see you. 
 
 Always, sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Paris . 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 2, 1919. 
 
 My Dear Sir: We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 31 
 answering ours of the 29th ultimo, handed to us by you in person this morning. 
 
 We desire to state that our object in requesting an opportunity of appearing 
 before the American Commission to Negotiate Peace was not to ask its good 
 offices to obtain a hearing before the peace conference of representatives of the 
 Irish Republic, as you state in your letter the commission has been led to be- 
 live. In order to remove this misapprehension, we respectfully submit the 
 following: 
 
 Our information is that the Government of Great Britain has definitely 
 denied safe conducts to these representatives, and hence they can not appear 
 before the peace conference or any committee thereof. 
 
 The resolutions and instructions of the Irish race convention, under which 
 we are acting, provide that if opportunity be not given the regularly chosen 
 representatives of Ireland, we should ourselves present her case; her insistence 
 upon her right of self-determination; and to international recognition of the 
 republican form of government established by her people. 
 
 We wish to advise the commission further that we do not hold, or claim 
 to have, any commission or authority from the people of Ireland or their 
 representatives; but desire in appearing before the commission solely and re¬ 
 spectfully to present the resolution of the American convention with a brief 
 argument in support thereof. 
 
 May we also point out that while we claim no official status in the govern¬ 
 mental sense, nevertheless, we are the representatives of a convention composed 
 of 5,132 delegates, democratically selected, representing every State in the 
 American Union; and the individuals who composed it may fairly be said to 
 have been men and women of all shades of political opinion, of all religious 
 sects, and of practically every trade, profession, and avocation which go to 
 make up our national life. 
 
 We think it likewise fair to state that this convention acted for many mil¬ 
 lions of our fellow citizens, who in this representative way respectfully urge 
 the commission to grant us a full hearing. 
 
 We therefore renew our request, and trust that the commission may see its 
 way clear to fix a time, at its pleasure and convenience, when we may appear 
 before it. 
 
 Awaiting the favor of an early reply, and with assurances of our great 
 respect, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman . 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Mr. J. C. Grew, 
 
 Secretary General American Commission to Negotiate Peace, Paris . 
 
 American Commission of Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 6 , 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We have the honor to hand you herewith report on 
 conditions in Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference. 
 On account of the serious and critical situation exposed by the report, we 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 811 
 
 beg that you will be good enough to give this document your careful considera¬ 
 tion, and also to present the same to the full peace conference or to the com¬ 
 mittee of the five great powers, whichever may be the proper course under the 
 practice of the conference. With assurances of our great respect and esteem, 
 we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 6, 1919. 
 
 Sir: Complying with you request of May 1 , 1919, made through Sir William 
 Wiseman and assented to by Messrs. Sean T. O’Ceallaigh and George Gavan Duffy, 
 the representatives at Paris of the Irish republican government, that we visit 
 every part of Ireland, and especially Belfast, to ascertain the actual conditions 
 existing in that country. 
 
 We have the honor to inform you that we have, except where prevented by the 
 use of military forces of the English army of occupation, visited the four 
 Provinces of Ireland, including Belfast, as well as the other principal cities and 
 towns. 
 
 We have prepared a report covering the facts, with certain recommendations. 
 
 In order that the Government of Great Britain may be informed, we herewith 
 hand you copy of this report, which, in addition to the presentation of facts, 
 contains a demand for an investigation under the authority of the peace con¬ 
 ference. 
 
 We also wish to advise your Government that the original of this document 
 has this day been handed to the President of the United States and that copies 
 have been transmitted to the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 
 United States through the Secretary of State. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Hon. David Lloyd-George, 
 
 Prime Minister of England, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 6, 1919. 
 
 Sir: We have the honor to hand you three copies of document entitled “ Re¬ 
 port on conditions in Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace confer¬ 
 ence,” which we have this day transmitted to the President, with copy to Hon. 
 David Lloyd-George, prime minister of England. 
 
 In view of the fact that the Senate of the United States is now considering 
 the subject of a new treaty or treaties with the Government of Great Britain, 
 and on account of the further fact that the House of Representatives has here¬ 
 tofore passed a resolution in favor of Ireland’s right of self-determination, 
 which has not been acted upon by the peace conference, unless in secret session, 
 of which we have had no advices, we respectfully request that you kindly 
 transmit one copy of this document to the Senate and one to the House of Rep¬ 
 resentatives of the United States, in conformity with the customs and practices 
 ■ •f the State Department. With assurances of our great respect and considera¬ 
 tion, we are, 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State of the United States, Paris . 
 
812 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, June 7, 1910. 
 
 My Dear Me. Walsh : I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 6, 
 inclosing the memorandum concerning conditions in Ireland and to say that I 
 have brought it to the President’s personal attention. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Gilbert F. Close, 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1910. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We inclose you herewith paragraph inadvertently 
 omitted from our “ Report on conditions in Ireland with demand for investiga¬ 
 tion by the peace conference,” which we had the honor of sending you upon 
 the 6th instant. The same should be inserted under the subtitle “ The revolu¬ 
 tion,” on page 13 of said report. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, Paris. 
 
 (A similar letter and inclosure also was sent to David Lloyd George, British 
 Prime Minister.) 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Dear Sir: We inclose to vou herewith two corrected copies of our “ Report on 
 conditions in Ireland, with demand for investigation by the peace conference.” 
 Will you be good enough to have these substituted for the ones heretofore 
 transmitted, or have the necessary corrections made? 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chainnan. 
 
 E. F. Dunne, 
 
 lion. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State, Paris 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Right Hon. Lord Birkenhead, 
 
 Lord Chancellor of England, House of Lords, London, England. 
 
 Sir : Upon the 22d ultimo, during the proceedings in the House of Lords on 
 that date, as published in the London Times, you made a statement, in reply 
 to a question of Viscount Midleton, as to the intentions of the prime minister 
 with reference to giving publicity to the result of the findings of our investiga¬ 
 tion of conditions in Ireland. 
 
 We beg, therefore, to submit to you herewith for presentation to the House 
 of Lords this report, together with copies of letters addressed to Hon. David 
 Lloyd George, prime minister. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 E. F. Dunne, 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 813 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Editor London Times, 
 
 London , England. 
 
 Sir: We have the honor to hand you herewith “Report on conditions in 
 Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference,” together with 
 copies of letters addressed to the President of the United States, the American 
 Secretary of State, and Hon. David Lloyd George, British prime minister, upon 
 the same subject. 
 
 As you are doubtless aware, charges have been made that matters deeply 
 affecting the peace of the world, such as the condition of Ireland, are habitually 
 suppressed by English newspapers. In order that your paper may be thor¬ 
 oughly advised, and that there should be no misunderstanding upon the subject 
 later, we take this opportunity to submit the inclosed documents. 
 
 Respectfully, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 (Similar letters and inclosures were sent to all leading English journals.) 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1019. 
 
 Sir: Upon the 14th ultimo, during the proceedings in the House of Commons 
 on that date, as published in the London Times, you made an official statement as 
 to the intentions of the prime minister with reference to giving publicity to tlio 
 result of the findings of our investigation of conditions in Ireland. 
 
 We beg, therefore, to submt to you herewith, for transmission to the cabinet, 
 this report, together with copies of letters addressed to His Majesty, King 
 George V, and Hon. David Lloyd-George, prime minister. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Mr. Bonar Law, Leader of the House of Commons, London, England. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 His Majesty George Y, King of Great Britain, London, England. 
 
 Your Majesty: We herewith transmit to you our “Report on conditions in 
 Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference,” together with 
 copies of letters addressed to your prime minister, Mr. David Lloyd-George. 
 
 The original of this report lias been delivered to the President of the United 
 States for presentation to the peace conference, and copies have been for¬ 
 warded to Hon. Robert Lansing, American Secretary of State, for transmission 
 to the Congress of the United States. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 13, 1919. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Gentlemen: Following Mr. Lansing’s letter of the 24th ultimo, conveying to 
 us the opinion of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace that further 
 effort to secure .the issuance of safe conducts by the British Government to 
 Messrs, de Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett would be futile and unwise, we pro¬ 
 ceeded, as you have been individually informed, to ourselves secure a hearing 
 before your full body upon the merits of the Irish case. 
 
814 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 While making this effort we are informed that the United States Senate has 
 passed a resolution requesting your honorable body to endeavor to secure a 
 hearing for the same gentlemen before the peace conference in order that they 
 might present the case of Ireland and expressing sympathy with the aspirations 
 of th people of Ireland for a government of their own selection. 
 
 In this situation we feel that further effort upon our part should be sus¬ 
 pended until the resolution is acted upon by your honorable body. 
 
 We most respectfully urge, both as American citizens and in our representa¬ 
 tive capacity, that early and favorable action be taken by your body upon the 
 Senate resolution. 
 
 If your commission concludes to so act upon the Senate resolution, and a 
 hearing is granted by the peace conference to the Irish representatives and 
 international recognition is accorded to the republican government set up by 
 the people of Ireland, there will be no necessity for further demand by us upon 
 your valuable time. 
 
 Will you therefore be good enough to advise us of whatever action your 
 honorable body may see tit to take at the earliest convenient moment? 
 
 With assurances of our appreciation for other courtesies, and indulging the 
 hope of an early response to this communication, we are, 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, July 13, 1919. 
 
 Mr. J. C. Grew, 
 
 Secretary General American Commission to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 Dear Mr. Secretary General: We are taking the liberty of handing you here¬ 
 with letter of even date addressed to the American commission to negotiate 
 peace, which we request that kindly hand to them at once. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, July 13, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We inclose you herewith copy of letter to-day addressed 
 to the American commission to negotiate peace, the original of which was for¬ 
 warded through Secretary General Grew, and to which we respectfully request 
 your early and kindly consideration. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, Paris. 
 
 (Similar letters were sent to Messrs. Lansing, Bliss, House, and W T hite.) 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, June 14, 1919. 
 
 Gentlemen : I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 13, together 
 with the inclosed copy of letter to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 and to say that your letter will receive my careful consideration. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, Paris. 
 
 Tasker H. Bliss. 
 
TREAT I OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 815 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 17, 1919. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 Gentlemen : Inasmuch as the peace terms are so close to signature, will yon 
 not be good enough to advise us at the earliest possible moment as to the 
 disposition by the full peace conference of the Senate resolution as follows: 
 
 “ Resolved, That the Senate of the United States earnestly requests the 
 American Peace Commission at Versailles to endeavor to secure for Edward 
 de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and Count George Noble Plunkett, a hearing before 
 said peace conference in order that they may present the cause of Ireland. 
 
 “ Resolved further, That the Senate of the United States express its sympathy 
 with the aspirations of the Irish people for a government of its own choice.” 
 
 In addition to the fact that we are receiving constant and urgent inquiries 
 in regard to the same, we wish to respectfully call to your attention that unless 
 action is taken very shortly, the delay itself will amount to a denial of the 
 request. 
 
 With assurances of our high regard and esteem, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, June 17, 1919. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Chairman American Commission of Irish Independence, Paris. 
 
 Sir : The American Commission to Negotiate Peace has the honor to acknowl¬ 
 edge the receipt of your letter dated June 17 and previous correspondence re¬ 
 garding the resolution of the Senate of the United States in connection with 
 the appearance of Edward de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and Count George Noble 
 Plunkett before the peace conference and to inform you that the commission 
 will not fail to comply with the request stated in your above-mentioned letter. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. Grew, Secretary General. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 17, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: On the 6th day of June, 1919, we had the honor to for¬ 
 ward you our “ Report on conditions in Ireland with demand for investigation 
 by peace conference,” the investigation to be conducted by an impartial body 
 appointed by the peace conference, and excluding from membership the inter¬ 
 ested countries; or a committee selected equally by the Prime Minister of Eng¬ 
 land and the elected representatives of Ireland, the chairman to be agreed upon 
 by parties, or, in case of failure to agree, by the Supreme Court of the United 
 States. 
 
 We now beg leave to point out that in the report heretofore forwarded to 
 you the most revolting acts committed against the people of Ireland were not 
 included, for the reason that many of the details of evidence covering the same 
 are in the exclusive possession of the chief secretary for Ireland, Mr. Ian Mac- 
 Pherson, and military and other officials under his authority. 
 
 The substantial accuracy of our report has been attested by some of the more 
 progressive and independent newspapers of England; but in view of certain 
 public statements by English officials and certain newspapers, we beg to make 
 the following additions to our report: 
 
 (1) Since the submission thereof, through use of an army of spies and 
 agents provocateurs, reprisals have begun against the persons and property of 
 those who are to bear witness to the truth of many of the atrocities reported; 
 and men and women are being arrested upon trumped-up charges and trans¬ 
 ported to places distant from their homes and friends, so as to be deprived of 
 assistance or defense. 
 
816 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY* 
 
 (2) The only charge In the report heretofore submitted to you which has, 
 so far as we know, received specific denial at the hands of any English authority 
 is the following: 
 
 “ Police and soldiers are habitually permitted to enter the cells where political 
 prisoners are confined and to beat them with their clubs.” 
 
 We are ready to substantiate this charge before the commission of Inquiry, 
 (a) by the production of large numbers of witnesses who have been thus 
 beaten; (b) by proof of witnesses of the highest standing, including American 
 citizens, who examined the ceils of the prisoners shortly after the beatings 
 and found the fresh blood still covering the walls of the cells; (c) by the pro¬ 
 duction of prisoners wiiose injuries did not prove fatal, but who have been 
 maimed and disfigured for life by the beatings of the soldiers and police. 
 
 In view of the conditions in Ireland as herein and heretofore set forth, which 
 W’e earnestly insist can not be ignored if the peace of the world is to be ac¬ 
 complished, as w r ell as the fact that if prompt action is not taken many more 
 innocent lives may be lost, and further brutalities committed, with the apparent 
 sanction of other nations; that evidence now in existence may be destroyed, 
 and witnesses placed beyond the reach of the commission of inquiry, we re¬ 
 spectfully request that you will be good enough to at once place these additional 
 facts before the peace conference and urge upon it the necessity and justice 
 of prompt acquiescence in the demand for a hearing before an impartial tri¬ 
 bunal such as heretofore described. 
 
 With considerations of our continued esteem and gr<jp.t respect, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 17, 1919. 
 
 Col. E. M. House, 
 
 Member of American Commission to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 Dear Col. House: We inclose you herewith copy of letter wdiich vre ars 
 to-day sending to the President, in reference to conditions existing in Ireland. 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 (Similar letters sent to Messrs. Bliss and White.) 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 17, 1919. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State and American 
 
 Commissioner to Negotiate Peace, Paris. 
 
 Dear Sir: We inclose you herewith copies of letter which we are to-day 
 sending to the President, in reference to conditions existing in Ireland. 
 
 We respectfully request that you transmit one copy of this letter to the 
 Senate and one to the House of Representatives of the United States, in con¬ 
 formity with the customs and practices of your department 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June IS, 1919. 
 
 Right Honorable Lord Birkenhead, 
 
 Lord Chancellor of England, 
 
 House of Lords, 
 
 London, England. 
 
 Sir: We hand you herewith copy of letter sent on the 17th instant to the 
 President of the United States, containing additional atrocities being corn- 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 817 
 
 mitted by the English Government in Ireland, so that you may he informed. 
 Copies of this letter have also been sent to Mr. Lansing, Secretary of State, 
 for transmission to the Congress of the United States. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Similar letters were also sent to Messrs. David Lloyd-George, Bonar Law, 
 the London Times, the Daily Mail, the Daily Herald, Manchester Guardian, 
 the Morning Post, and other widely-known English newspapers. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Pans, 18, 1919. 
 
 Gentlemen : Gen. Bliss has received your letter of 17 June, 1919, inclosing 
 coply of letter of even date to the President in reference to conditions existing 
 in Ireland, and has asked me to acknowledge its receipt, with his thanks. 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 W. B. Wallace, Colonel, General Staff. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Paris, June 19, 1919. 
 
 The American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Gentlemen : We inclose to you herewith copy of letter this day forwarded to 
 Hon. David Lloyd-George, British prime minister, relating to the ease of 
 Countess Markievicz. 
 
 If your honorable commission can officially or individually aid in securing 
 the release of this worthy woman, we beg to assure you that the ends of 
 justice will be served thereby, and that it will be an act of humanity for which 
 you will receive the kindly gratitude of many millions of people. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 19, 1919. 
 
 Hon. David Lloyd-George, 
 
 British Prime Minister, Paris. 
 
 Sir : We desire to respectfully call your attention to the case of Countess 
 Markievicz, and to enter our most solemn protest against the conduct of the 
 British Government and its officials toward her. 
 
 On June 6, 1919, we had the honor to submit to you, for your official consid¬ 
 eration and action as Prime Minister of Great Britain a report of certain 
 atrocities and cruelties inflicted by the English army of occupation on the in¬ 
 habitants of Ireland, with a demand for the appointment of a special committee 
 of inquiry by the peace conference. 
 
 We have been advised that the Countess Markievicz, who is a member of the 
 Irish parliament and minister of labor in the Irish republican cabinet, has been 
 arrested and confined in jail upon an inconsequential charge; and that the 
 punishment now being inflicted upon her is in the nature of a reprisal and in 
 retaliation for giving information in regard to certain of the atrocities con¬ 
 tained in our report. 
 
 We wish to point out that the Countess Markievicz is a woman of refine¬ 
 ment, splendid intellectual gifts, courageous spirit, and of spotless character, 
 and has a place deep in the affections of the people of Ireland as well as many 
 millions in the United States. 
 
 During our interviews with the Countess Markievicz in Dublin a few weeks 
 ago, we observed that while she is a woman of high spirit and strong will, 
 her health is not robust, and we greatly fear that the harshness of jail life may 
 result in her death. 
 
818 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 Our reasons for making the charge that the cruelties now being inflicted upon 
 the Countess Markievicz are in the nature of reprisals by the British Govern¬ 
 ment are as follows: • 
 
 (1) Much of the detailed evidence of atrocities committed against women 
 prisoners in Ireland was furnished us by the Countess Markievicz. 
 
 (2) She has in her possession the evidence of certain unspeakable outrages, 
 the details of which have not yet been published, but which we intend to sub¬ 
 mit to the commission of inquiry when selected by the peace conference. 
 
 (3) We have indubitable proof at hand that during the course of our in¬ 
 vestigation in Ireland the Countess Markievicz was shadowed by spies in the 
 employ of the British Government, and direct threats were made against her 
 during the progress of our inquiry. 
 
 (4) She was arrested on a frivolous charge after our report was sent to you, 
 and while publication of it was absolutely forbidden in Ireland, where the facts 
 were easily ascertainable, and during the time the same was being withheld 
 from publication by the English press. 
 
 (5) The sentence imposed upon her is for a length of time which would keep 
 her in jail during the inquiry that may be made by the peace conference. 
 
 (6) The alleged utterances for which she is now imprisoned were made a 
 month or more before her arrest, and no action had been taken upon them, 
 as we are informed, until after the receipt of our report on English atrocities 
 by the chief secretary for Ireland, Mr. Ian MacPherson. 
 
 (7) That during our visit to Ireland we heard many public qtterances of the 
 same import as those for which the Countess Markievicz is in jail, delivered in 
 and out of the Irish parliament, and upon which no action whatever was taken 
 by the Government. 
 
 We sincerely hope that, animated by a decent regard for the opinion of man¬ 
 kind, which we know you cherish, and in view of the foregoing considerations, 
 especially having in mind the danger to the life of the Countess Markievicz 
 through continued suffering in jail, you will use your great powers and author¬ 
 ity as prime minister of Great Britain to secure the immediate release of this 
 worthy woman. 
 
 We have, moreover, reason to apprehend that arrests of other women who 
 suffered atrocities on their own persons while in jail, or who were witnesses to 
 them being practiced on others, are impending, and that it is the purpose of 
 the English Government to imprison in Ireland or remove from that country 
 men and women whose testimony may be indispensible to the proposed investi¬ 
 gation. 
 
 We wish to assure you that we are not making this request at the instance 
 of the Countess Markievicz, nor at the suggestion of the representatives of the 
 republican government in Ireland, but on the grounds— 
 
 (a) Of our common humanity; and 
 
 (b) So that when the committee of inquiry is appointed those upon whom 
 atrocities have been practiced, or who have witnessed the same, will not be 
 dead, incarcerated in prison, or so broken in health as to be unable to attend 
 the hearing. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 20, 1919. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Gentlemen : We beg to advise you that the American Federation of Labor 
 at its national annual session now being held at Atlantic City, N. J., by unani¬ 
 mous vote adopted a resolution urging the international recognition of the re¬ 
 publican form of government now existing in Ireland and urging the peace 
 conference to give a hearing to Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and Count 
 George Noble Plunkett on the case of Ireland. 
 
 May we point out some of the reasons which we respectfully submit should 
 move your honorable body to make every effort to have this resolution complied 
 with: 
 
 (1) The American Federation of Labor has enrolled in its membership more 
 than 3,000,000 men and women, with a sphere of legitimate influence embracing 
 many millions more. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 819 
 
 (2) The American Federation of Labor contributed a high percentage to the 
 overseas army of the American Expeditionary Forces. 
 
 (3) The organization was the basis and strong bulwark of the division of in¬ 
 dustry behind the military forces of the United States, without which the war 
 could not have been won. 
 
 (4) Mainly through the efforts of this great organization, its veteran leader, 
 and other otlicials the productivity of our country during the great World War 
 was maintained at the highest point, and not one day’s delay was occasioned in 
 the production of essential war materials by strikes or labor disputes. 
 
 (5) The American Federation of Labor, aside from its purely industrial 
 activities, is, we believe, without exaggeration, the most powerful force existent 
 in the world to-day for the maintenance of that democracy cherished and prac¬ 
 ticed by us, and for the universal establishment of which America entered the 
 World War; and to which the world must look for safety amid the clash of 
 conflicting governmental ideas, ranging from the reactionary ambitions of mon¬ 
 archies and autocracies to the extreme dangers of unrestraint and chaos. 
 
 We also take this occasion to point out that since we made our original re¬ 
 quest to your honorable body on behalf of the Irish race in America, urging you 
 to endeavor to secure a hearing for the Irish case before the peace conference, 
 the United States Senate, with practical unanimity, has made the same request; 
 and we have transmitted to you from bodies representing vast numbers of 
 American citizens of all shades of political belief, composing all groups which 
 make up our national life, cablegrams to the same effect. 
 
 In view of the fact that the day is so close at hand upon which we all earn¬ 
 estly hope the terms of peace will be signed, with the greatest respect, but 
 with all urgency, we would ask the favor of a reply to the following questions: 
 
 («) Has the American Commission to Negotiate Peace or any individual 
 member thereof made a request to the general peace conference .for a hearing 
 for Messrs, de Valera, Grith, and Plunkett? 
 
 (6) Has your honorable body, or any individual member thereof, made a 
 request to the peace conference for the international recognition of the Irish 
 republic? 
 
 (c) Has your honorable body, or any individual member thereof, made 
 request of the peace conference for any person or persons to present the case 
 of Ireland, and its right to self-determination, to the peace conference? 
 
 (d) If all or any such requests have been made, have the same been con¬ 
 sidered by the peace conference; and if so, has answer thereto been received 
 from the peace conference or any official representative thereof? 
 
 (e) If such requests have not been made, will your honorable body be good 
 enough, in view of the manifold petitions and appeals herein referred to, and 
 in the cause of humanity and justice, make such requests, or any thereof which 
 you may deem proper; and if so, promptly advise us as to the result or make 
 "the* same public, so that all of your petitioners may be advised. 
 
 With considerations of our great respect and esteem, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chair man. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 20, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We inclose herewith, for your information, copy of 
 letter addressed to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, which was 
 this day delivered to Mr. J. C. Grew, secretary general. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, Paris. 
 
 (Similar letters were sent to Messrs. Lansing, House, Bliss, and White.) 
 135549°—10-5 ’ 
 
820 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, June 21, 1919. 
 
 My Dear Sm: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of June 17, 
 which arrived during the President’s absence in Brussels, and to say that 1 
 am bringing it to his personal attention. 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Gilbert F. Close. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 Confidential Secretary to the President. 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Paris, June 21, 1919. 
 
 Mr. Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 American Commission for Irish Independence, 
 
 Grand Hotel, Paris. 
 
 Sm: I beg to acknowledge, on behalf of the American Commission to Nego¬ 
 tiate Peace, the receipt of your letter of June 20, in which you advise the com¬ 
 mission of a resolution adopted by the American Federation of Labor at its 
 annual session now being held at Atlantic City and ask certain questions with 
 regard to the recent Senate resolution. 
 
 In reply to your letter I beg to inform you that, in accordance with advice 
 which has already been given you. a copy of the said Senate resolution was 
 forwarded to the president of the peace conference, Mr. Clemenceau. Mr. 
 Clemenceau, alone, is competent to bring this whole question to the attention 
 of the conference. Beyond this, of course—as you very readily will appre¬ 
 ciate—neither the American commission as a whole nor any of its individual 
 members can take any further steps in the premises. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. Grew, Secretary General. 
 
 [Copy of telegram,] 
 
 Paris, June 25, 1919. 
 
 Ian MacPherson, 
 
 Chief Secretary for Ireland, Dublin Castle, Dublin, Ireland. 
 
 Proof has been submitted to us at Paris that you are using your official power 
 as well as the forces of the English Army of Occupation in Ireland to suppress 
 our full reply to your answer to our report on conditions in Ireland, which was 
 made on the 21st instant. Your answer, published broadcast, made denials of 
 certain portions of our report and serious personal accusations against us. We 
 are also advised that through the same instrumentalities you are suppressing 
 altogether or causing to be printed garbled accounts of statements and affidavits 
 made by individuals and officials in Ireland supporting the report of our com¬ 
 mission and challenging the accuracy of your answer. We most earnestly pro¬ 
 test against this unfair procedure and arbitrary abuse of authority as repugnant 
 to the modern conception of justice and fair play held by right thinking men 
 and women, which we had hoped applied to the English officials In Ireland as 
 well as to the rest of mankind. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence* 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman* 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Note. —This telegram was never answered. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 27, 1919. 
 
 M. Georges Clemenceau, 
 
 President of the Peace Conference and Premier of France, Paris. 
 
 Monsieur le President: We have received formal notification from the secre¬ 
 tary general of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace that the whole 
 Irish question is now referable to you alone. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 821 
 
 We therefore beg leave, as the representatives of the Irish race in America, 
 to submit to you copies of the following documents, i. e.: 
 
 (a) The repudiation by the representatives of the Irish republic of the 
 usurped right of England to enter into obligations or agreements affecting 
 Ireland. 
 
 (b) Official report of the American commission on Irish independence on 
 conditions in Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference. 
 
 Pending action by the full peace conference upon the request already sub¬ 
 mitted to you by Messrs. Sean T. O'Ceallaigh and George Gavan Duffy, the en¬ 
 voys of the Irish republic at Paris, for a full hearing before the peace con¬ 
 ference, we desire to urge upon you the urgent necessity of the early creation 
 of an impartial commission of inquiry to investigate and report upon the actual 
 state of war now existing between the people of Ireland and the English Army 
 of occupation, with especial reference to the atrocities and acts of barbarism 
 still being perpetrated. 
 
 Since the filing of our original report with President Wilson and the Ameri¬ 
 can commission to negotiate peace, the following acts of savagery are being 
 perpetrated by the English Army of occupation on the Irish people, which we 
 submit are in violation of the rules of civilized warfare, and which, if per¬ 
 mitted to continue, will render impassible the just pacification of the world 
 for which its people are so earnestly striving: 
 
 (1) Lives are being taken, or men and women are being maimed and wounded 
 daily. 
 
 (2) An organized effort to destroy the homes of the peoples of Ireland is 
 being waged; 
 
 (3) Orders of banishment are issued frequently against people, commanding 
 them to leave their homes at the risk of death and under penalty of imprison¬ 
 ment ; 
 
 (4) Raids are being made upon peaceful towns and villages by aeroplanes: 
 
 (5) The homes and places of business of the inhabitants are beiing invaded 
 and ransacked; looting is being carried on in a most shameful manner; 
 
 (6) Property of great value is being confiscated, for which reparation will be 
 impossible, unless opportunity is quickly given to prove and inventory the 
 losses; 
 
 (7) Barricades and emplacements for artillery and machine guns are being 
 erected, which menace the lives and property of the people; 
 
 (S) The meeting places of the workers of Ireland are surrounded bv ma¬ 
 chine guns, so that the workers are in imminent peril of death while endeavor¬ 
 ing to carry on the lawful and ordinary activities of their organizations; 
 
 (9) Reprisals of a cruel and unusual character are being practiced in retali¬ 
 ation for the efforts to present the case of Ireland to the peace conference; 
 
 (10) Delicate and aged men and women are being confined in noisome and 
 Insanitary jails solely on account of their political opinions. 
 
 As the president of the peace conference, to which the peoples of the world 
 are looking for the establishment of peace, and the adoption of instrumentalities 
 which will put an end to existing wars and prevent future conflicts, we most 
 earnestly urge upon you the immediate presentation of the accompanying docu¬ 
 ments to your honorable body, and the great necessity for early action thereon. 
 
 With considerations of our high esteem and respect, we are, 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 [Personal and urgent.] 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, July 22, 1019. 
 
 M. Georges Clemenceau, 
 
 President of the Peace Conference and Premier of France , Paris. 
 
 Monsieur le President: We are in receipt of information from sources of 
 high authorities that, as president of the peace conference, you have notified 
 American peace plenipotentiaries that, so far as further consideration of the 
 Irish question is concerned, the matter is one in which you will take no action. 
 We understand this decision covers: 
 
822 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 1. That the resolution of the American Senate, officially forwarded to you 
 by the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, and the recommendations 
 contained therein expressing sympathetic support to the people of Ireland in 
 their efforts to obtain a government of their own choice, is, by this action, 
 denied in a manner suggestive of your entire disregard of American public 
 opinion as rendered in the deliberate resolution of our highest legislative body. 
 
 2. That the peace conference further ignores the request of the Hon. Messrs. 
 Walsh and Dunne for the appointment of an international tribunal to investi¬ 
 gate into the charges of barbarities and inhuman conduct, in violation of the 
 rules of civilized warfare, perpetrated by the British Government through its 
 military forces in occupation of Ireland, and upon its defenseless people. 
 
 The knowledge of your decision in these matters, has been up to now with¬ 
 held from the American public. The results of the publication of this informa¬ 
 tion will doubtless have very material weight at this time while the attention 
 of the United States Senate is occupied in matters of International importance, 
 in which, we feel France has a material interest. Arrangements have already 
 been made for giving widespread publicity in America to this decision on your 
 part. But before taking this step, we respectfully suggest that an audience 
 may be granted by you to the undersigned to present the importance of the 
 situation, particularly in this relation to the future interests of France, of 
 America, and of Great Britain. 
 
 There are 20,000,000 citizens of Irish blood in the United States, and the 
 effect of this information, when published there, needs no characterization by 
 us to indicate how grave may be the danger to the continuance of those same 
 relations of amity and esteem that have marked the friendships existing be¬ 
 tween the French, American, and Irish peoples. 
 
 Trusting that I may be accorded the honor of this audience with you at 
 your earliest possible convenience, and, with assurances of high esteem and 
 respect, we have the honor to remain, 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 John Archdeacon Murphy, 
 
 Commissioner in Charge. 
 
 Report on Conditions in Ireland With Demand for Investigation by the 
 
 Peace Conference. 
 
 The Irish race convention held in Philadelphia on the 22d and 23d of Feb¬ 
 ruary, 1919, provided by resolution for the appointment of a committee of 25 
 by the chairman, and instructed it to use all honorable means to secure for 
 Ireland her right of self-determination. 
 
 This general committee selected from its own body Frank P. Walsh, of New 
 York, former Gov. Edward F. Dunne, of Illinois; and Michael J. Ryan, of Phila¬ 
 delphia, as a special commission to go to Paris. The instructions of this special 
 committee were as follows: 
 
 “ To obtain for the delegates selected by the people of Ireland a hearing at 
 the peace conference, and to place before the conference, if that hearing be not 
 given, the case of Ireland; her insistence upon her right of self-determination; 
 and to international recognition of the republican form of government estab¬ 
 lished by her people.” 
 
 Upon their arrival at Paris a letter signed by all the commissioners was 
 addressed to President Wilson asking him to obtain from the British Govern¬ 
 ment safe conducts for Eamon de Yalera, Arthur Griffith, and Count George 
 Noble Plunkett, the representatives selected by the people of Ireland, from 
 Dublin to Paris and return; and also asking him to accord an interview to the 
 American commission. 
 
 In response to this letter the President wrote to Mr. Walsh, chairman of the 
 commission, granting him an interview, and fixing the time. 
 
 The President gave an exhaustive hearing to the case as presented by Mr. 
 Walsh, and referred him to Col. E. M. House with instructions to say that he 
 believed the request a proper one, and that it should be granted. 
 
 The entire commission waited upon Col. House, advised him of the sugges¬ 
 tion of the President, and presented the request in writing for safe conducts 
 for Messrs. De Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett. Col. House promised to take the 
 matter up with Mr. Lloyd-George immediately and to use every effort to have 
 the safe conducts granted. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 823 
 
 Upon the following day Col. nouse announced to the commission, who again 
 called upon him in a body, that he had communicated with the prime minister 
 of England, and that in all likelihood the safe conducts would be granted; but 
 that Mr. Lloyd-George was very desirous of having an interview with the 
 American commissioners personally and would be glad to have Chairman Walsh 
 take up the matter of fixing the time and place for the meeting with Mr. Lloyd- 
 George’s confidential secretary, Mr. Philip Kerr. 
 
 The commission notified Col. House at once that they did not seek a confer¬ 
 ence with Mr. Lloyd-George; doubted very much the wisdom or propriety of 
 meeting him, but finally agreed to do so as a matter of courtesy. 
 
 Later in the day the entire commission called upon Col. House and stated 
 that, under no circumstances did they wish to be relegated to Mr. Lloyd-George 
 on the question of the issuance of the safe conducts, but were relying upon him, 
 Col. House, as one of the American commissioners, to secure compliance with 
 the request, if possible. With this clear understanding they would meet the 
 Prime Minister. 
 
 Mr. Lloyd-George, on the plea of being closely occupied with the preparation 
 of the German peace terms, put off the proposed meeting with the delegates 
 from time to time, covering a period of something like two weeks. 
 
 The American commission finally called upon Col. House, explained once 
 more that no part of the duties of their mission called for a meeting with Mr. 
 Lloyd-George, and asked him to address a formal request for the safe conducts 
 for Messrs. De Valera, Griffith, and Plunkett, to Mr. Lloyd-George, and secure, 
 if possible, a prompt and direct answer to that request. 
 
 Upon the same day, and shortly before the visit of the commission to 
 Col. House, Messrs. Sean T. O’Ceallaigh and George Gavan Duffy, the repre¬ 
 sentative of the Irish republic in Paris, conveyed an invitation from President 
 De Valera to the commission to visit Dublin, and gave, among other reasons, 
 the necessity for a conference upon matters of grave importance at the time 
 transpiring in Ireland. 
 
 When we arrived at the office of Col. House in the Hotel Crillon that evening 
 to receive an answer from Mr. Lloyd-George, we found Sir William Wiseman, 
 the liaison officer between the American and British embassies in Paris. He 
 presented the apologies of Mr. Lloyd-George for the delay, and said that Mr. 
 Lloyd-George would like to fix a time for the interview upon some day of the 
 following week. Mr. Walsh, speaking for the commission, replied that if they 
 were to remain another week in Paris before receiving an answer to their 
 request for the safe conducts, they wished to use the time in a visit to Ireland 
 for the purpose of meeting the representatives of the Irish people and of mak¬ 
 ing a first-hand investigation of conditions in Ireland. 
 
 As the passports of the members of the commission did not include England 
 and Ireland, it was necessary to have them amended, which was expeditiously 
 done, the amended passports reading that the members of the commission were 
 going to Ireland on an “unofficial political mission,” and the forms of the pass¬ 
 ports were made diplomatic, which greatly facilitated their movements. 
 
 It should be noted that after the visit to Ireland demands were made in the 
 English Parliament for a full report from the prime minister as to whether or 
 not it was true that he intended issuing safe conducts to the Irish representa¬ 
 tives, and also if it was his purpose to have an interview in Paris with the 
 members of the American commission. 
 
 Mr. Bonar Law, leader of the House of Commons, made official answer for 
 the prime minister and stated that Mr. Lloyd-George had not and never had 
 the slightest intention of granting safe conducts to the Irish representatives. 
 He said that Mr. Lloyd-George had agreed to the visit of the American commis¬ 
 sion to Ireland, hoping upon their return that he could press upon them the 
 “ English point of view,” to be used as propaganda in America. 
 
 The lord chancellor, officially replying to the same questions in the House 
 of Lords, likewise denied, on behalf of the prime minister, that there was ever 
 any intention to grant safe conducts to Messrs. De Valera, Griffith, and 
 Plunkett, and declared it was the purpose of the prime minister to have present 
 at his interview with the American commission upon their return from Ireland 
 all of the American newspaper correspondents, so that he (the prime minister) 
 might make a statement of England’s attitude on the Irish problem which 
 would tend to allay the growing prejudice against England in the United 
 States. 
 
 When the passports were handed to the American commissioners on the morn¬ 
 ing of their departure for Ireland, Sir William Wiseman stated that Mr. Lloyd- 
 
824 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 George wished the commission to go to all parts of Ireland, If possible and 
 it was his especial request that they should visit Belfast. 
 
 Upon repeating Sir William Wiseman’s resuest to Messrs. Sean T. O'Ceallaigh 
 and George Gavan Duffy, the envoys of the Irish republican government at 
 Fails, they joined in the request that we should make a close investigation of 
 conditions in Ireland, and especially urged that we should visit the jails, par¬ 
 ticularly those in the larger cities, where, they asserted, hundreds of men and 
 women were confined under circumstances of the most shocking nature. 
 
 Crossing the Irish Sea from Holyhead to Dunleary we came upon the first 
 evidence of the military occupation of Ireland. The vessel and wharves swarmed 
 with soldiers, fully equipped for the field, going to and coming from Ireland. 
 
 When we arrived in Ireland we found soldiers everywhere. A careful investi¬ 
 gation made on the day before we left Ireland showed that the army of 
 occupation numbers considerably over 100,000 men, to which accessions are 
 being made daily. The troops are equipped with lorries, armored cars, tanks, 
 machine guns, bombing planes, light and heavy artillery; and in fact all of the 
 engines of war lately employed against the Central Powers. 
 
 In addition to this there are approximately 15,000 members of the Royal 
 Irish Constabulary. The constabulary is a branch of the military forces. They 
 are armed with rifles, as well as small side arms, engage In regular drill and 
 field maneuvers. They are never residents of the districts which they occupy, 
 and have quarters in regular government barracks. 
 
 After our arrival In Ireland we conferred with President De Yalera as to the 
 prison^ which we should visit, and Mountjoy Jail, in the city of Dublin, was 
 selected, for the reason that it contained a large number of political prisoners, 
 many of them men of the highest character and standing. Mountjoy, so far 
 as physical equipment and brutality of conduct goes, is not as bad as many of 
 the other jails in Ireland. 
 
 We made our demand for permission to visit this jail through the municipal 
 authorities of the city of Dublin. The governor of the prison, a resident of 
 England, who had been in office but a few weeks, refused us admission. 
 It was then explained to Sir John Irwin, chairman of the visiting justices 
 of Mountjoy prison, that the commission was traveling on diplomatic pass¬ 
 ports and was investigating conditions in Ireland, partly at the solicitation 
 of the prime minister. With this explanation Sir John Irwin, who is in su¬ 
 preme authority of the jail, overruled the decision of the governor and we 
 were admitted to Mountjoy. 
 
 When we appeared at the gate we were ushered Into the office of the 
 governor, w T here we found Sir John Irwin. The governor told us that we 
 were to be admitted to the prison, but with the understanding that we should 
 not speak to any prisoner nor seek to fix the identity of any prisoner 
 exhibited. 
 
 Although Mountjoy Is called a jail it Is, as a matter of fact, a combination 
 of jail and penitentiary. It .is surrounded by a stone wall 20 feet in height, 
 and is larger than any of the midwestern American penitentiaries, such as 
 Jefferson City or Joliet, and almost as large as Sing Sing. It has immense 
 cell houses, built to accommodate approximately 1,000 prisoners. It is equipped 
 with workshops, where men convicted of serious crimes are confined at hard 
 labor. It is also used for the confinement of persons awaiting trial, as well 
 as misdemeanants serving sentences for petty offenses. 
 
 Exclusive of the political prisoners, there were hut 12 persons in confinement, 
 all of them undergoing sentence for petty infractions of law. 
 
 One of the men who accompanied us upon the visit was an official of the city 
 of Dublin, well acquainted with all of the political prisoners, so that we had no 
 difficulty in identifying them. They were confined for the most part in groups, 
 the majority of them being locked up in steel cages built in the yards of the 
 prison, entirely outside of the buildings proper. These cages are exact 
 duplicates of those used for wild animals in the larger zoological gardens, 
 such as Lincoln Park and the Bronx in the United States. 
 
 Statements had been made that unspeakable outrages were being committed 
 against the persons of these men and the most barbarous cruelties inflicted 
 upon them. That they had been starved, beaten, confined in dark and noisome 
 underground cells, otherwise maltreated, and kept for days with their hands 
 handcuffed behind their backs. 
 
 We attempted to secure statements from the officers, either confirming or 
 denying the charges. We were permitted to talk to no one inside the prison 
 except the governor. He stated that no such barbarities had been committed 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 825 
 
 since he had taken charge of the prison a week or two before. He refused to 
 speak for any time prior to that He- at first denied that there were under¬ 
 ground cells in the prison. We had been furnished, however, with a plan 
 showing tlicir location, and upon our insistance we were allowed entrance. 
 We found a great number of cells underground too narrow for human occupa¬ 
 tion, without beds or covering for the prisoners, no ventilation, pitch dark, and 
 extremely cold, although the weather at the time was not severe. The chief 
 warden admitted that these cells were at times occupied by prisoners. 
 
 Our information, well authenticated, Is to the effect that a large number 
 of political prisoners were taken out of the underground cells after we had 
 demanded admission the night previous. 
 
 We found one of the political prisoners still in solitary confinement. He 
 presented a pitiable spectacle. The miserable cell was cold and badly ven¬ 
 tilated. He was in an unkempt condition, highly nervous, palpably under¬ 
 nourished, and had a wild glare in his eyes, Indicating an extremely dangerous 
 mental state. He tried to speak to us, but was quickly silenced by the warder. 
 
 The political prisoners in this jail, without exception, are men of the highest 
 standing—journalists, lawyers, business men, skilled tradesmen, and laborers. 
 Many of them, confined for months, have not been informed of the charge 
 against them. All of them are denied the right of trial by jury. When charges 
 are made—often of the most trivial character—bail is denied. They were all 
 emaciated and appeared to be suffering from malnutrition. Of the thousands 
 of German prisoners we have seen in France none of them showed such wretched 
 physical condition or had countenances so marked with pain as the prisoners 
 in Mount joy. 
 
 As we were leaving the prison we were attracted by shouts in the rear of 
 the main hall of the prison. Looking around we saw Fierce Beasley, one of 
 the political prisoners, an Irish journalist of the highest standing, and one 
 of the most beloved men in Ireland, being hustled through the back door-way 
 by a burly prison guard. 
 
 Beasley cried out, “ I want to call your attention to the fact that this brute 
 who has me in charge is about to punish me for saying, ‘Long live the repub¬ 
 lic.’ ” We immediately protested against the assault on Mr. Beasley. The 
 governor of the prison hastened back to where the men were, and, after a 
 hurried whispered conversation with the guard, returned and said that we 
 could be assured that no punishment would be inflicted upon Mr. Beasley. 
 
 Upon our return from the prison we were furnished with detailed state¬ 
 ments of others who had been confined in the prison, exposing the vilest 
 atrocities committed against prisoners. 
 
 Having received information that there were a large number of prisoners 
 confined in a smaller prison in the town of Westport, County Mayo, which 
 place was invested by troops, we announced our intention after leaving Mount- 
 joy jail, of visiting Westport. Shortly before the departure of our train upon 
 the following evening two policemen appeared at our apartments, and handed 
 us an unsigned typewritten letter, notifying us that we would not be per¬ 
 mitted to enter the town of Westport, the only reason given being that it was 
 “ within a military area.” We proceeded, nevertheless, to Westport. 
 
 As we approached the town a company of soldiers met us about three miles 
 out, and the lieutenant announced, in a surly tone, that under no circum¬ 
 stances would we be permitted to enter. We demanded to see the colonel, 
 to whom we showed our passports, repeated the message of Mr. Lloyd-George 
 delivered through Sir William Wiseman, to the effect that he wanted us to 
 visit all of Ireland, explained that we were conducting an investigation under 
 the authority of the Prime Minister. We advised him that we understood that 
 revolting conditions existed in Westport. The colonel, however, declared that 
 he would take the full responsibility of not complying with the request of even 
 so high a personage as the Prime Minister of England, though he stated that 
 he was acting on orders from the Government officials in Dublin. 
 
 Many of the persons we met in the vicinity corroborated the stories of brutal 
 treatment to which prisoners in the Westport jail were being subjected, the 
 details being horrible beyond belief. 
 
 During our visit to Ireland we witnessed numerous assaults in public streets 
 and highways with bayonets and clubbed rifles upon men and women known to 
 be republicans, or suspected of being in favor of a republican form of govern¬ 
 ment. Many of the outraged persons were men and women of exemplary char¬ 
 acter and occupying high positions in the business and professional life of the 
 country. 
 
826 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY* 
 
 We took statements covering hundreds of cases of outrage and violence com¬ 
 mitted by the officers and representatives of the English Government in Ire¬ 
 land, the details of which we set forth herein. 
 
 The excesses and atrocities detailed are either being actually committed at the 
 present time or have been committed within the recent past, as a part of a 
 scheme and plan to crush out and repress the effort of the Irish people to estab¬ 
 lish a republican form of government in Ireland. 
 
 Upon the basis of what we witnessed ourselves, as well as statements 
 of men and women of unimpeachable integrity, we make the following spe¬ 
 cific charges: 
 
 (1) Within the past few months at least 10 citizens have been killed by 
 soldiers and constables under circumstances which in a majority of the cases 
 coroners’ juries found to be willful murder under the laws of England; the 
 last man having been murdered in this way less than one month ago. 
 
 In all of these cases the perpetrators of the crimes have gone unpunished. 
 
 (2) Hundreds of men and women have been confined for months in the 
 vilest prisons without any charges being preferred against them. 
 
 (3) At least five men have died as the result of atrocities perpetrated 
 upon them while in prison, the post-mortem examination in some of the cases 
 disclosing marks of violence upon the bodies of the victims. 
 
 (4) Prisoners are confined in narrow cells with hands handcuffed behind 
 them day and night. In this condition they are fed by jail attendants. 
 They are permitted no opportunity of answering calls of nature, and are com¬ 
 pelled to lie in their clothing, befouled by human excrement, for days at a 
 time. 
 
 (5) Persons are confined in cells which are not large enough for one man. 
 They are not provided with beds or bunks of any kind, but are compelled 
 to sleep upon the bare floors. There are no toilet facilities or receptacles to 
 contain the human offal, which necessarily accumulates upon the floors 
 where men are compelled to sleep in the filth night after night. 
 
 (6) The food is insufficient and unwholesome. Prisoners, men and women, 
 are compelled to live for days upon water and poorly baked sour and stale 
 bread. 
 
 (7) Hundreds of men and women have been discharged from jail with 
 impaired constitutions, and are in many cases incurable invalids as a result 
 of their treatment. 
 
 (8) During the past winter and spring streams of ice-cold water were 
 poured upon men confined in jail, and they were compelled to lie all night on 
 cold floors in unheated cells in their wet clothing. Many of them were after¬ 
 wards removed to outside hospitals suffering with pneumonia. 
 
 (9) Police and soldiers are habitually permitted to enter the cells where 
 political prisoners are confined and to beat them with their clubs. 
 
 (10) Solitary confinement in most horrible form is generally practiced. 
 Numbers of prisoners have been taken directly from the jails to insane 
 asylums, rendered maniacs by their treatment. 
 
 (11) Large bodies of political prisoners, in certain jails, have beep kept 
 without any food whatever for days at a time. 
 
 (12) The right of privacy no longer exists in Ireland. The homes of the 
 people are constantly being invaded by armed men, and the occupants, in¬ 
 cluding delicate women and young children, cruelly beaten and otherwise mal¬ 
 treated. 
 
 (13) The children of suspected republicans, many of tender years, are kid¬ 
 napped and their parents kept in ignorance of their whereabouts for weeks. 
 
 (14) Women and children of refinement and respectability are arrested 
 without warrant, and in company of rough and brutal soldiers transported to 
 distant parts of Ireland and England, where they are confined in jail with the 
 lowest prostitutes, some of whom are suffering from vile diseases, and are 
 compelled to use the same toilet facilities and thus expose themselves to the 
 danger of infection. 
 
 (15) The right of private property no longer exists in Ireland. Places of 
 business of republicans are invaded by soldiers and constables, fixtures de¬ 
 stroyed and property confiscated without compensation. In many cases the 
 owners of such businesses and property are utterly impoverished. 
 
 (16) Heads of hundreds of families have been jailed or deported, leaving 
 dependent women and children without means of subsistence, and rendered 
 objects of public charity. 
 
 (17) Men and women on mere suspicion of having republican sympathies 
 jura being taken from their homes and arrested upon the streets and highways 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 827 
 
 of Ireland; deported to England, or confined In jails in remote places, while 
 their distracted families are kept sometimes for many months in ignorance 
 of their whereabouts. 
 
 Among the leaders of the republican movement in Ireland, many of whom 
 have had these atrocities practiced upon their persons, are lawyers, such as 
 Edward Duggan, George Nichols, and John Hanrahan, who rank relatively 
 with such men in the United States as Morgan J. O’Brien, John B. Stanchfield, 
 Levi Mayer, or A. Mitchell Palmer. 
 
 Some of the men whom we actually saw in jail, in a pitiable condition, were 
 newspaper men who rank with Henry Watterson, or the late Col. William R. 
 Nelson, of Kansas City. This comparison is made because two of the prisoners 
 in Mountjoy, Messrs. Pierce Beasley and William Scares, are the owners or 
 principal stockholders of papers which they edit themselves. Many others we 
 actually saw in prison are working newspaper men and correspondents of high- 
 class publications, such as Charles II. Grasty, Frank H. Simmonds, and Her¬ 
 bert Bayard Swope. 
 
 Among the men we saw in prison are stock raisers and farmers, business 
 men of large affairs, and literary men of brilliant parts and of the highest 
 character. 
 
 We witnessed while in Ireland a brutal and unprovoked assault by an Eng¬ 
 lish colonel and a crowd of soldiers upon the person of Prof. John Mac Neill. 
 Prof. Mac Neill is a member of the faculty of the National University, is an 
 educator and publicist of the highest type, a member of Parliament, and occu¬ 
 pies relatively the same position in Ireland that William Howard Taft or 
 Nicholas Murray Butler does in the United States. 
 
 EDUCATION. 
 
 If England ever had an educational system in Ireland it has completely 
 broken down. 
 
 The Irish people are taxed more for the support of the police and con¬ 
 stabulary, although the country is practically crimeless in the ordinary sense, 
 than they are for the maintenance of the whole educational system of Ireland, 
 including the upkeep of the National University, Trinity College, as well as all 
 the primary and other schools in the land. 
 
 School teachers in the primary schools are paid as low as $4 per week. 
 
 No system of hygiene or sanitation has been installed. The teeth of practi¬ 
 cally all the children are in decay, and respiratory and throat troubles exist to 
 an alarming degree. 
 
 Lack of decent clothing and undernourishment is keeping thousands of 
 children out of school. 
 
 ANTISOCIAL CONDITIONS. 
 
 In the city of Dublin alone there are 20,000 families, on an average of five to 
 each family, living in one-room tenements. Infant mortality is appalling. 
 Destitution and hunger are rife. 
 
 Municipal bodies and private persons attempted to extend relief, but such 
 activities must have the sanction of the English Government, which is difficult, 
 if not impossible, to obtain. 
 
 LAND LAWS. 
 
 The much vaunted land laws have not appreciably aided in decreasing 
 poverty in the agricultural districts. 
 
 Leaving out of the question the manifold defects and hardships in the 
 operations of the law, all the farmer might gain by his ownership of the land 
 is taken away from him by unjust taxes and monopolistic control of the neces¬ 
 saries of life. _ . . T 
 
 When the first land law was passed in 1881 the direct per capita tax in Ire¬ 
 land was about $6 per head. At the present time the direct taxation, imposed 
 by British law, amounts annually to the enormous sum of $45 per head. 
 
 ‘ Indirect taxation of the people can not be accurately estimated, but is 
 higher proportionately than in any other country in the world. 
 
 The age-old curse of absentee landlordism still cuts deeply into the economic 
 heart of Ireland. Hundreds of thousands of its most fertile acres are owned by 
 foreigners. As quickly as the rich crops are garnered they are taken out of 
 
823 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 the country, and this immense food supply and almost infinite source of wealth 
 is lost to her people forever. 
 
 England has cut off Ireland from the outside commerce of the world, allows 
 no ship to come trans-Atlantic to her ports, and thus controls the prices of the 
 necessaries of life for her inhabitants. 
 
 This combined system of taxation and monopoly automatically takes away 
 the legitimate profit from the farmer, no matter how fertile the land, propitious 
 the season, or energetic the individual, and sucks the life blood out of all 
 industry. 
 
 LABOR. 
 
 Ireland has the best organized and most coherent labor movement in the 
 world. It is being thwarted and suppressed by the army and constabulary. 
 Wages of unskilled workers are below a line which means to them, hunger, cold, 
 and privation. The wage of skilled labor is far below the minimum for decent 
 
 existence. 
 
 In many of the larger cities and towns the trade-unions have a 100 per cent 
 organization. We met and interviewed almost all of the national leaders of 
 labor. The heads of the National Irish Labor Party, which is in control of the 
 situation, are, without exception, ardent republicans, fully alive to their rights 
 and insisting on self-determination for Ireland. They have all been the innocent 
 victims of atrocities against their own persons such as are enumerated herein, 
 in the jails of Ireland and England. 
 
 They work along traditional trade-union lines. If their country is not freed 
 of foreign control and exploitation, and quickly, many of them declare that in 
 sheer defense of their own lives, they will be compelled to set up local Soviet 
 governments, and refuse longer to produce wealth for their oppressors. 
 
 THE DEVOLUTION. 
 
 Ireland for the first time in more than 100 years is absolutely cut off from 
 England, its regularly elected members of Parliament having with few excep¬ 
 tions refused to go to Westminster. They are attempting, under the guns of 
 the English soldiers, to hold orderly sessions in tlie Mansion House in Dublin. 
 
 There is a military oiganizatiou of approximately 200,000 republican volun¬ 
 teers of fighting age, poorly equipped as to arms, and without artillery. They 
 appear to be well officered, and seemingly maintain a perfect organization, en¬ 
 gaging in daily drills and frequent maneuvers. Upon all sides may be heard 
 declarations that they are ready to light and die fc-r the right of seLf-detenoina- 
 tion, no matter how great the odds against them may be. 
 
 Guerilla warfare of the character which usually precedes major conflicts is 
 now going on in Ireland. Aimost every day there are fights between small de¬ 
 tachments of the army of occupation and groups of republican volunteers. 
 One day the British soldiers prevail, with the result that citizens are killed. 
 In another day or two perhaps the republican volunteers are successful, with 
 the result that soldiers are killed. Frequently the British soldiery wound* and 
 capture the volunteers, and in turn the volunteers kill or wound the soldiers 
 and retake the prisoners. 
 
 With a ferocity unparalleled even in the history of modern warfare, within 
 the past few days men and women have been shot down in the streets of Dublin. 
 
 The killing by the British Government of these republican volunteers would 
 not settle the Irish problem. Those below the fighting age, and even the chil- 
 dren of Ireland, are singing The Soldier’s Song, shouting 44 Long live the re¬ 
 public,” and trying to enlist in the revolutionary movement. 
 
 ENGLISH TESTIMONY. 
 
 Mr. Erskine Childers, an English writer of high repute, who served Great 
 Britain throughout the war in the Royal Naval Flying Corps, coming out a 
 major, made the following declaration in regard to the Irish situation in the 
 London Daily Herald of May 20, 1819: 
 
 “ I could bomb a crowd from an aeroplane with a better conscience (and 
 more skill) than engage in this cold blooded systematic condemnation of 
 respectable people to the rigors and ignominies of jail life—to loss of health, 
 loss of business and career, too often to loss of life; not for breaking the moral 
 law, but in very truth or obeying that universal law which impels men worthy 
 ©f the name of men to become free.” 
 
TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 829 
 
 Lord Cavendish Bentinck, a Unionist member of the House of Commons, 
 within the last month declared upon the floor of that body, that England was 
 cot governing Ireland, but was engaged in a mere scuffle with the Irish people. 
 
 The lord chancellor of England, in an official report to the House of Lords 
 within the last fortnight, made the confession that the vast majority of tha 
 people of Ireland were now in open rebellion against the rule of the British 
 Government. 
 
 Bight Hon. Herbert H. Asquith, former prime minister of Great Britain, 
 made the following statement upon June 2, 1019, which appeared in to-day’s 
 London Daily Mail: 
 
 “ Lord French is at present viceroy of Ireland, which to-day is the darkest of 
 the dark spots on the map, not of Great Britain, but of the world.” 
 
 DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATION. 
 
 All of the charges herein made are based upon the actual observation of tha 
 signers while in Ireland, or upon the statements of men and women of unim¬ 
 peachable character, who are prepared to make direct legal proof of every 
 crime and atrocity set forth. 
 
 The Govenment of Great Britain, up to this time, has measurably succeeded 
 in hiding the details of these atrocities from the peace conference and the people 
 of the world. From time to time, when crimes and atrocities are forced into 
 publicity, they are met in three ways. 
 
 (1) Some distinguished English statesman or high official, usually one with¬ 
 out personal knowledge of the facts, solemnly denies the truth of the charges. 
 
 (t>) The British press impressively and unanimously denounces the charges 
 as false, and carries many communications from persons claiming to have 
 knowledge of the facts, and bearing testimony to their falsity. 
 
 (c) Government investigations before partisan judges, where testimony is 
 controlled by implicated officials, resort often being had to intimidation of wit¬ 
 nesses and subornation of perjury. 
 
 In order that the peace conference may act in the light of knowledge of the 
 conditions, and be fully advised as to the effort of England to keep the people 
 of Ireland in subjection by military power and violence, in contravention of 
 the principles for which the peace conference was convoked, we respectfully 
 urge the appointment of a commission to ascertain the facts and report the same 
 to the peace conference, and respectfully submit the following alternative sug¬ 
 gestions as to its formation and appointment: 
 
 (a) That an impartial committee be appointed by the peace conference, 
 authorized to sit in the cities of Dublin and London, to take testimony as to the 
 alleged facts herein set forth. 
 
 None of the members of such committee to be residents or citizens of Great 
 Britain, Ireland, or any of the countries under the domination of Great 
 Britain, or over which that country claims to exercise a protectorate or control. 
 
 (b) That a committee of seven be selected immediately in the manner fol¬ 
 lowing. 
 
 The prime minister of England shall select three members; the elected 
 representatives of Ireland, including Unionists, Nationalists, and Republicans, 
 shall, by a majority vote, select three members of said committee; that the 
 six members thus selected shall agree upon a chairman, who shall be a resident 
 and citizen of the United States, France, or Italy. In case of inability or 
 failure to agree upon a chairman, the selection shall be made by the Supreme 
 Court of the United States. That the Government of Great Britain and the 
 elected members of Parliament from Ireland, as aforesaid, shall each have the 
 right to select its own counsel, to conduct the examination of witnesses and 
 assist in the investigation, the only restriction being that counsel so selected 
 shall be reputable members of the legal profession in good standing in the 
 country of which he or they are citizens. 
 
 We sincerely urge that if the peace conference refuses a hearing to the 
 people of Ireland, in these circumstances, the guilt for the commission of these 
 monstrous crimes and atrocities, as well as for the bloody revolution which 
 may shortly come, must, from this time forward, be shared with Great Britain 
 by the members of the peace conference, if not by the peoples whom they 
 represent. 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, C'hairman, 1 
 
 E. F, Dunne. 
 
 Paris, June S, 1919 . 
 
830 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris , June 6, 1919. 
 
 Dear Mr. President: We have the honor to hand you herewith report on 
 conditions in Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference. 
 
 On account of the serious and critical situation exposed by the report, we 
 beg that you will be good enough to give this document your careful consider¬ 
 ation, and also to present the same to the full peace conference or to tlie com¬ 
 mittee of the five great powers, whichever may be the proper course under 
 the practice of the conference. 
 
 With assurances of our great respect and esteem, we are, 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 The President of the United States, 
 
 Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 6, 1919. 
 
 Sir : We have the honor to hand you three copies of document entitled “ Re¬ 
 port on conditions in Ireland, with demand for investigation by the peace 
 conference,” which we have this day transmitted to the President, with copy 
 to Hon. David Lloyd-George, prime minister of England. 
 
 In view of the fact that the Senate of the United States is now considering 
 the subject of a new treaty or treaties with the Government of Great Britain, 
 and on account of the further fact that the House of Representatives has here¬ 
 tofore passed a resolution in favor of Ireland’s right of self-determination, 
 which has not been acted upon by the peace conference, unless in secret 
 session, of which w T e have had no advices, we respectfully request that you 
 kindly transmit one copy of this document to the Senate and one to the House 
 of Representatives of the United States, in conformity with the customs and 
 practices of the State Department. 
 
 With assurances of our great respect and consideration, we are, 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman, 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Hon. Robert Lansing, 
 
 Secretary of State of the United States, Paris. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 6, 1919. 
 
 Sir: Complying with your request of May 1, 1919, made through Sir William 
 Wiseman, and assented to by Messrs. Sean T. O’Ceallaigh and George Gavan 
 Duffy, the representatives at Paris of the Irish republican government, that we 
 visit every part of Ireland, and especially Belfast, to ascertain the actual con¬ 
 ditions existing in that country. 
 
 We have the honor to inform you that we have, except where prevented by 
 the use of the military forces of the English army of occupation, visited the 
 four provinces of Ireland, including Belfast, as well as the other principal cities 
 and towns. 
 
 We have prepared a report covering the facts, with certain recommendations. 
 
 In order that the Government of Great Britain may be informed, we herewith 
 hand you copy of this report, which, in addition to the presentation of facts, 
 contains a demand for an investigation under the authority of the peace con¬ 
 ference. 
 
 We also wish to advise your Government that the original of this document 
 has this day been handed to the President of the United States, and that copies 
 have been transmitted to the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 
 United States, through the Secretary of State. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Hon. David Lloyd-George, Prime Minister of England, Paris. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 831 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Your Majesty : We herewith transmit to you our “ Report on conditions in 
 Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference,” together with 
 copies of letters addresser to your prime minister, Mr. David Lloyd-George. 
 
 The original of this report has been delivered to the President of the United 
 States for presentation to the peace conference, and copies have been forwarded 
 to Hon. Robert Lansing, American Secretary of State, for transmission to the 
 Congress of the United States. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 His Majesty George Y, King of Great Britain, London, England. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Sir: Upon the 22d ultimo, during the proceedings in the House of Lords on 
 that date, as published in the London Times, you made a statement, in reply to 
 a question of Viscount Midleton, as to the intentions of the prime minister with 
 reference to giving publicity to the result of the findings of our investigation 
 of conditions in Ireland. 
 
 We beg, therefore, to submit to you herewith, for presentation to the House 
 of Lords, this report, together with copies of letter addressed to Hon. David 
 Lloyd-George, prime minister. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. ' 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Right. Hon. Lord Birkenhead, 
 
 Lord Chancellor of England, House of Lords, 
 
 London, England. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Sir : Upon the 14th ultimo, during the proceedings in the House of Commons 
 on that date, as published in the London Times, you made an official statement 
 as to the intentions of the prime minister with reference to giving publicity to 
 the result of the findings of our investigation of conditions in Ireland. 
 
 We beg, therefore, to submit to you herewith, for transmission to the cabinet, 
 this report, together with copies of letters addressed to His Majesty King 
 George V and Hon. David Lloyd-George, prime minister. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Mr. Bonar Law, 
 
 Leader of the House of Commons, 
 
 London, England. 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, June 8, 1919. 
 
 Sir: We have the honor to hand you herewith “Report on conditions in 
 Ireland with demand for investigation by the peace conference,” together with 
 copies of letters addressed to the President of the United States, the American 
 Secreary of State, and the Hon. David Lloyd-George, British prime minister, 
 upon the same subject. 
 
 As you are doubtless aware, charges have been made that matters deeply 
 affecting the peace of the world, such as the condition of Ireland, are habitually 
 suppressed by English newspapers. In order that your paper may be thor- 
 
832 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 oughly advised and that there should be no misunderstanding upon the subject 
 later, we take this opportunity to submit the inclosed documents. 
 
 Respectfully, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, Chairman. 
 
 E. F. Dunne. 
 
 Editor London Times, 
 
 London, England . 
 
 [This report was given publicity in Paris on the morning of .Tune S, 1919. 
 Inasmuch as the report had the appearance of having been suppressed by all of 
 the London papers except the Daily News and Herald, special copies were for¬ 
 warded to the editors in London, accompanied by identical letters as above.] 
 
 Reply to the Statement or the IIon. Ian MacPherson, Chief Secretary fob 
 
 Ireland, by Frank P. Walsh, Chairman of the American Commission on 
 
 Irish Independence. 
 
 At the request of the Hon. David Lloyd-George, prime minister of England, 
 transmitted by Sir William Wiseman, secretary of the British embassy at Paris, 
 and assented to by Messrs. Sean T. O’Oalleagh and George Cavan Duffy, envoys 
 of the Irish republic at the peace conference, the American Commission on Irish 
 Independence, represented by Hon. Edward F. Dunne, former governor of Illi¬ 
 nois. Michael J. Ryan, of Philadelphia, and myself visited the four Provinces of 
 Ireland, including Dublin, Cork, Belfast, and other large cities, for the purpose 
 of ascertaining existing conditions. 
 
 Upon June 3, 1919, the American Commission transmitted its report to the 
 peace conference, at the same moment handing copes to President Wilson, His 
 Majesty King George V, the prime minister of England, and likewise forwarding 
 copies to the Senate of the United States. 
 
 The report contained a list of hideous atrocities being practiced upon the 
 people of Ireland by the English army of occupation in Ireland. The report 
 was suppressed by the English censor in Ireland, and the English, press Initially 
 printed incomplete and garbled accounts thereof. 
 
 After a silence of more than two weeks and upon the insistent demand of 
 the English press, notably the London Times, Mr. Ian MacPherson, English 
 Chief Secretary for Ireland, issued a categorical statement confessing many of 
 the charges denying others and making explanations in the nature of avoidance 
 covering many of them. The answer of Mr. MacPherson was editorially de¬ 
 nounced by the London Times as ha-lting and evasive; by the London News, 
 Manchester Guarian, and London Herald as containing damaging and shameful 
 admissions of misgovernment and violation of human rights in Ireland. 
 
 Upon the 27tli of July there was released to the American papers and all of 
 the news agencies an additional answer by Mr. MacPherson to the atrocity 
 charges reported by the American Commission, making sweeping denial of 
 the same. 
 
 An issue of fact is thus clearly raised. If the original charges are true, 
 England should be execrated by the liberty-loving people of the world, and 
 Mr. MacPherson must go down in history as not only the prime mover and 
 defender of the unspeakable crimes and cruelties set forth in the report, but as 
 a dishonest and untruthful person. If the charges are untrue, then the signers 
 of the report should be exposed as malicious falsifiers. 
 
 The original reports of the American Commission contained the following; 
 
 In order that the peace conference may act in the light of knowledge of the 
 conditions and be fully advised as to the effect of England to keep the people 
 of Ireland in subjection by military power and violence in contravention of the 
 principles for which the peace conference was convoked, we respectfully urge 
 the appointment of a commission to ascertain the facts and report the same to 
 tlie peace conference, and respectfully submit the following alternative sug¬ 
 gestions as to its formation and appointment: 
 
 (a) That an impartial committee be appointed by the pence conference, au¬ 
 thorized to sit in the cities of Dublin and London, to take testimony as to the 
 alleged facts herein set forth. 
 
 None of the members of such committee to be residents or citizens of Great 
 Britain. Ireland, or any of the countries under the domination of Great Britain, 
 or over which that country claims to exercise a protectorate or control. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 833 
 
 (b) That a committee of seven be selected Immediately in the manner fol¬ 
 lowing : 
 
 The Prime Minister of England shall select three members; the elected repre¬ 
 sentatives of Ireland, including Unionists, Nationalists, and Republicans, shall, 
 by a majority vote, select three members of said committee; that the six 
 members thus selected shall agree upon a chairman, who shall be a resident 
 and citizen of the United States, France, or Italy. In case of inability or 
 failure to agree upon a chairman, the selection shall be. made by the Supreme 
 Court of tho United States. That the Government of Great Britain and the 
 elected members of Parliament from Ireland, as aforesaid, shall each have the 
 right to select its own counsel, to conduct the examination of witnesses selected, 
 shall be reputable members of the legal profession in good standing in the coun¬ 
 try of which ho or they are citizens. 
 
 The latest answer by Mr. MacPlierson, published broadcast in America, con¬ 
 sists mainly of bald denials, unsupported by any citation to [sic] the military 
 authorities who have first-hand information as to the truth or falsity of tho 
 charges, and without informative detailed proof to substantiate the same. 
 
 Assuming that England must eventually agree to an impartial court of inquiry 
 substantially along the lines suggested herein, we make offer to prove the fol¬ 
 lowing : 
 
 ASSAULT UPON PROP. MACNELLL. 
 
 In addition to the statements of the investigators who witnessed the assault, 
 we will produce at least 20 impartial persons who saw the assault and who will 
 testify to its brutal nature and the insults which accompanied it 
 
 POLITICAL PRISONERS IN ANIMAL CAGES. 
 
 To prove that the prisoners in Mountjoy Prison were exhibited in cages 
 ordinarily used for wild animals, we will produce photographs of the cages 
 unless they have been removed,’ in which event we will produce at least 50 
 prisoners who occupied them and a countless number of impartial witnesses 
 who saw them. 
 
 VICTIMS RENDERED INSANE. 
 
 We will produce the records of the jails and insane asylums, as well as the 
 victims who have recovered, and the relatives of those who have not, to prove 
 our charges that numbers of Irish republicans were rendered insane by their 
 treatment. 
 
 PNEUMONIA VICTIMS. 
 
 We will produce hospital records, testimony of physicians of the highest 
 standing, as well as intelligent and impartial witnesses who treated and saw the 
 victims while suffering from pneumonia, caused by having cold water thrown 
 upon them from a hose in different prisons, also names and death certificates of 
 those who died from the treatment. 
 
 DEAD, WOUNDED, AND DISABLED. 
 
 We wdll produce a list of the dead, those who were permanently maimed and 
 disfigured by the atrocities practiced upon them; also a list of those whose 
 health has been shattered and who have been rendered incurable invalids by 
 their treatment, all accompanied by names and dates. 
 
 VIOLENT SUPPRESSION OF LABOR. 
 
 We will produce proof that the leaders of the national labor movement have 
 been arrested without being informed of any charge against them, confined in 
 jail in many instances for weeks and months; that while so confined they were 
 treated with extreme' harshness and cruelty; that their activities are spied 
 upon by an army of detectives and their meetings infested by agents provoca¬ 
 tive; that their orderly meetings have been dispersed by the military authorities 
 and violent assaults committed upou the bodies of men and women seeking to 
 carry on the orderly business of their organizations; that permanent machine- 
 
834 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 gun emplacements have been erected and guns mounted thereon by the military 
 engineers of the Army of Occupation, so that Liberty Hall in Dublin, the head¬ 
 quarters of the Irish National Labor Union, may be subjected to destructive 
 assaults at a moment’s notice. 
 
 INDISPUTABLE PROOF OF OTHER CHARGES. 
 
 These, as well as the other charges in the original and supplemental report 
 of the investigators, we are ready to substantiate not only by the testimony 
 of the victims, but by hundreds of disinterested witnesses, including past and 
 present members of the English Army and Royal Irish Constabulary, who, 
 sickened at the atrocious acts they were called upon to perform and witness, 
 either resigned their commissions or now stand ready to sacrifice their careers 
 in the interest of humanity and justice. 
 
 The issue now has been clearly made and formally submitted to the people of 
 the United States and the world by the official reports of the American Com¬ 
 mission on Irish Independence and the formal reply of Hon. Ian MacPherson, 
 chief secretary for Ireland, representing Great Britain in the controversy. We 
 respectfully submit, not only in justice to the character of the signers of our 
 original report, which we assert to have been unjustly and maliciously as¬ 
 sailed, but to the cause of a righteous and enduring peace, that unless the 
 English Government quickly agrees to the institution of an impartial court of 
 Inquiry by the peace conference its case should go by default and England must 
 stand convicted by thinking mankind as a cruel marauder of human rights and 
 the one remaining government of the world imposing its rule upon others by 
 force of arms and exploiting weaker peoples by ugly might alone. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Chairman American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 New York, August 4, 1019. 
 
 [Copy of cablegram.] 
 
 New York, August 8, 1019. 
 
 Ian MacPherson, 
 
 Chief Secretary for Ireland, 
 
 Dublin Castle, Dublin, Ireland: 
 
 Am forwarding you by mail to-day reply to your statement denying facts set 
 forth in report of American Commission on Irish Independence, dated June 3, 
 1919, so that you may be advised. Meantime I can not overlook the issue of 
 personal veracity and honor which you have injected into the controversy. 
 This is to inform you that unless you immediately join in request for appoint¬ 
 ment of impartial committee of inquiry by the peace conference I shall publicly 
 stigmatize you as a falsifier and your answer to our report as a piece of willful 
 mendacity on the part of a high official unparalleled in the field of crooked 
 politics. 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, 
 
 Chairman American Commission on Irish Independence. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. I want to say, of course, Mr. Chairman and Senator 
 Fall, that w T e will be very glad to accede to whatever is the pleasure 
 of this committee. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. We want nothing secret, Mr. 
 Walsh. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I think it is a good idea. Neither do we want any¬ 
 thing secret. At the same time, there were certain elements about 
 it that we thought they would prefer to have held confidential. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. They were our delegates, were 
 they not ? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes; and we claim, and I presented a legal argument 
 to Secretary Lansing on the proposition, that they had in no way 
 divested themselves of their official character; that they were sent 
 over there for this purpose; that they not only had the right to 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 835 
 
 attend to the matter in hand, but that they had the right to hear 
 any representative American citizen in any sort of representative 
 capacity that had anything to present. We will be glad to submit 
 these documents under whatever rules you may be pleased to make. 
 
 (Subsequently the committee ordered the confidential documents 
 to be made a part of the record, and they are here printed, as 
 follows:) 
 
 Interview Between President Wilson and Messrs. Edward F. Dunne and 
 
 Frank P. Walsh, at the President’s House, 11 Place Des Etats Unis, Paris, 
 
 Wednesday, June 11, 1919. 
 
 Mr. Walsh and Gov. Dunne called upon the President by appointment at 2.15 p. m. 
 
 Gov. Dunne started by saying that Mr. Walsh would open the case concerning which 
 we called. 
 
 Mr. Walsh stated to the President that we had come to see him to ask him if he would 
 not .secure a hearing for us before the “Big Four,” or whatever other committee might 
 be delegated to hear the case of Ireland. That we had made a formal request of Mr. 
 Lansing for safe conduct for Messrs, de Yalera, Griffith, and Plunkett, and had re¬ 
 ceived a communication from him to the effect that it would be futile to make the 
 request. The President interrupted Mr. Walsh and said, “That is an official request, 
 Mr. Walsh.” Mr. Walsh stated that he had not been able to disentangle this official 
 and unofficial business. He said, “What I am talking about is the denial of our 
 request that the Americans should intervene to get the safe conducts for these men.” 
 
 The President said, “Well, of course, since that time, gentlemen, you know the 
 Senate has passed a resolution upon the subject.” Mr. Walsh said, “Well, the point 
 of our request to-day is that if we are to assume that these men are not going to be 
 allowed to come here, then we want to advise you that the people of Ireland are in 
 actual physical captivity; that those who would speak for them are not allowed to 
 come here, and are restrained by the force of an army of occupation which is now 
 occupying the country.” 
 
 We called the attention of the President to the fact that at the outbreak of the war 
 there was a home-rule bill signed by the King and which ought to have been put in 
 operation, but in violation of their so-called English law, it was not put into operation. 
 Later the time for its operation was extended for a year, and later ag£tin it was extended 
 until after the war. Lloyd-George then gave out a formal call for a convention. The 
 convention was organized under the chairmanship of Sir Horace Plunkett. It began 
 to reach a stage where it looked as though there was going to be an agreement; as a 
 matter of fact when the Irish get together, north and south, they always almost agree. 
 "When Lloyd-George saw there was going to be an agreement, he wrote a letter to the 
 convention stating, among other things, that the English Government would recog¬ 
 nize nothing which they did that might interfere with the existing system of taxa¬ 
 tion and conduct of the array. This meant that no matter what the convention did, 
 England could still exploit Ireland and keep her under subjection by her army of 
 occupation. 
 
 Mr. Walsh further stated that England now has a blockade against Ireland as effective 
 as the Allies had against the Central Powers; that it amounts to an impost upon every 
 bite of food that the people of Ireland bring in from the outside, and on everything 
 that they ship outside the island. Mr. Walsh told the President that no ships were 
 allowed to touch at any port, trans-Atlantic, that the country could not trade with the 
 United States or other countries, and other countries could not trade with it. That 
 Ireland was the most lawabiding country on the face of the earth, with a great respect 
 for law and order and the rights of private property, but that unless some relief was 
 given that the workers there would have, in self-defense, to set up Soviet governments 
 or do something else to relieve the situation. 
 
 The President said, “Of course, you should understand that no small nation of any 
 kind has yet appeared before the Committee of Four, and there is an agreement 
 among the Committee of Four that none can come unless unanimous consent is given 
 by the whole committee.” 
 
 Gov. Dunne addressed the President, and said: “Has no small nation complaining 
 of injustice on the part of any of the victor nations ever appeared as yet? ” The Presi¬ 
 dent said, “There is no nation that has had its right considered by the peace confer¬ 
 ence except those that were actually cqncerned in the war. We have not attempted 
 to inquire into ancient wrongs. ” 
 
 Mr. Walsh then said, “Mr. President, it is the present injustice, and the guerilla 
 warfare that now exists, that we think should receive consideration. Suppose we 
 present a case of this kind, a country in which a state of war actually exists. Do you 
 
 135549°—19-6 
 
836 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 mean to say, Mr. President, that you would just close the matter and let the war go 
 on?” The President replied, “I am only qne of this conference, why should this 
 whole thing be left to me?” Mr. Walsh said, “We are leaving it to you, Mr. Presi¬ 
 dent, because you are the commanding figure in the peace conference, and because 
 it was you who raised the hopes in the hearts of these people that they could come to 
 you. We come to you because we are asking you to use your powerful influence 
 with the other members of the committee to get us a hearing. ” 
 
 Mr. Walsh further said, “In my conversations with the representatives of the Irish 
 republic, President de Valera asked me to ask you a question. I will read from your 
 statements at the time we entered the war.” Mr. Walsh then read the following: 
 
 “Peace should rest upon the rights of peoples, not on the rights of governments— 
 the rights of peoples, great and small, weak or powerful; their equal right to freedom 
 and security and self-government, and to participation, upon fair terms, in the eco¬ 
 nomic opportunities of the world. 
 
 ****** * 
 
 “It is the principle of justice to all peoples and nationalities, and their right to 
 live on equal terms of liberty and safety with one another, whether they be strong 
 or weak. Unless this principle be made its foundation, no part of the structure of 
 international justice can stand. 
 
 ****** * 
 
 “No man, no group of men, chose these to be the issues of the struggle. They are 
 the issues of it, and they must be settled by no arrangement or compromise or adjust¬ 
 ment of interests, but definitely and once for all, and with a full and unequivocal 
 acceptance of the principle that the interest of the weakest is as safe as the interest of 
 the strongest. * * * The impartial justice meted out must involve no discrimina¬ 
 tion between those to whom we wish to be just and those to whom we do not wish to 
 be just. It must be justice that plays no favorites and knows no standards but the 
 equal rights of the several peoples concerned.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh continued: “Now, then, Mr. President, Mr. De Valera asked me to say 
 to you—inasmuch as you state these are the issues; that there must be no arrangement 
 or compromise, and that they must be settled definitely and once for all—to ask you 
 now where is the place to settle them definitely, once for all, and how shall his people 
 do it. Now that he is to be denied the right to come here by England, and you tell 
 us now that we can not appear, in effect, before the peace conference, he asks this 
 question, and I ask you. Where will he go? Where shall his people go? If it is to 
 be settled definitely and once for all, and you say that the issue is made—and we 
 agree with you that it is made—now, where is it to be settled definitely and once 
 for all?” 
 
 The President said, “Mr. Walsh, do you think that any considerable number of 
 people, when they read my declarations, thought that these settlements were to be 
 made at some particular place, automatically, immediately?” Mr. Walsh replied, 
 “Mr. President, I can speak first for myself. When I read it, I believed you meant 
 Ireland. I believe that practically all the people in Ireland believed that, and all 
 that I have met of our own people believed it.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh continued, “Mr. President, I am afraid you do not understand the Irish 
 situation.” The President replied: “If you think I do not understand the Irish 
 question, what did you come to me about it for?” Mr. Walsh replied: “I do not 
 mean, Mr. President, that you do not understand the general history of Ireland, but 
 I do say that you do not know what is going on in Ireland to-day; that is, its exploita¬ 
 tion by England, the shooting down of its people in the streets, the sea blockade 
 which England has in force against it—in short—all of the atrocities that are being 
 
 r raeticed upon its citizens at this very moment.” The President said, “Of course, 
 do not claim to know the local and specific matters referred to.” Mr. Walsh said, 
 “I believe you received an invitation to go to Ireland. I think it would be a fine 
 thing for yourself and for the peace of the world if you accepted that invitation. The 
 people would be delighted if you went to Ireland, and get an understanding of the 
 situation at first hand.” 
 
 The President said: “Now, Walsh, if it is your intention to go back to America and 
 try to put me in bad, I am going to say when I go back that we were well on the way 
 of getting Mr. De Valera and his associates over here; we were well on the way, when 
 you made it so difficult by your speeches in Ireland that we could not do it; that it 
 was yon gentlemen who lacked over the apple cart.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh replied, “Mr. President, have you read the statement made by the Lord 
 Chancellor in the House of Lords and the statement made by Mr. Bonar Law in the 
 House of Commons, both officially speaking for Mr. Lloyd-George, in which they 
 stated that it was not his intention, and never had been, to grant safe conducts to 
 
TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 837 
 
 hese men, and that it was his purpose, in having an interview with us after we came 
 hack fro n Ireland, to state the ‘English case’ to the American press representatives 
 and serve England and not serve the people whom we were representing over here. 
 Did you read that? ” 
 
 The President said, “Now, Walsh, I am not going to discuss anything that was said 
 in the British House of Commons or House of Lords, except to say this, that I was 
 making an effort, and Col. House was making an effort, and that we thought we were 
 well on the way of getting do Valera and his associates over here, but the speeches 
 of you gentlemen gave such offense that the whole thing had to be abandoned.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said, “Mr. President, I have written a letter to Mr. Lansing, to which 
 we have received no reply, asking him what were the utterances that offended these 
 gentlemen, and who were the persons who were offended. Perhaps you may be able. 
 Mr. President, to answer it. Was it Mr. Lloyd-George?” 
 
 The President said, “I have not said anything about Mr. Lloyd-George.” Mr. 
 Walsh said, “Who was it, then, to whom we gave offense?’’ The President replied, 
 “Well, I would say that you offended the whole British Government.” Air. Walsh 
 then said, “Well, then, you do not accept what Mr. Lloyd-George said to the effect 
 that he was not going to allow them over in any event?” The President said, “Mr. 
 Walsh, I am not going to discuss Mr. Lloyd-George.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said, “Would you be good enough to see the gentlemen who were offended, 
 and if that was what stood in the way, if two others would come before them that had 
 not given such offense, would they answer their request?” The President said 
 “There is no use discussing that; I don’t know what the British Government would 
 say, and I have said all I can say on the subject.” 
 
 The President continued, “I want you gentlemen to understand that our position 
 is this: That we are dealing officially with these Governments. You would not want 
 us to make representations or engage in an effort that might involve the sending of 
 troops into Europe, and I know that our people would not want that. What I am 
 saying to you is that we can not, and under no circumstances could we have at any 
 time since we have been here, do anything in this matter of an official nature; but I 
 want to say to you that I have the deepest sympathy for Ireland and her people and 
 her cause. I know I speak for the others when I say that all we could do unofficially we 
 have been doing and will do.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said, “In order that there may be no misunderstanding, may I ask i? 
 any of your efforts have been directed toward anything except securing to these 
 people the right of self-determination, and the right to have a free government just 
 like the Government of the United States?” The President said, “What I will say 
 to you is this: That you know the lines that we were discussing.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said, “Mr. President, the Irish people believe in these principles that 
 you laid down, and believe that they come wholly within the description of a people 
 whose people have determined their own rights with reference to their government. 
 And I want to call your attention to this fact: That no mediations or negotiations or 
 intercourse with the representatives of Great Britain can possibly accomplish any¬ 
 thing at this time. W 7 e do not desire to have any, and so far as we are concerned we 
 do not desire anyone else to have any for us. The attitude of the English Govern¬ 
 ment is this: By force of arms, by an army of occupation in Ireland, it is assuming to 
 legislate for Ireland. It can do anything to Ireland or for Ireland that its might gives 
 it the power to do. So that if England has anything that it thinks is good for the 
 Irish people it has the power to impose it at once. In addition to this the Irish people 
 have a right to say, ‘We will die Before we will live under any such law.’ So that 
 no discussion or mediation or negotiation that you or anybody else would have with 
 the representatives of the English Government could do anything for Ireland. Mr. 
 President, you mentioned having your attention called to a resolution of the Senate 
 of the United States requesting safe conducts for Messrs, de Valera, Griffith, and 
 Plunkett.” The President said, “Yes; you saw that.” Mr. Walsh said, “Yes; but 
 I only saw the newspaper text of it; we wired for the text and did not get it. ” “ W 7 ell, ” 
 
 the President said, “I saw that; we have been advised of it.” Mr. Walsh said, “Mr. 
 President, what action do you propose to take on the request of the Senate? ” The 
 President replied, “That is a matter that has not yet been taken up by our full con¬ 
 ference.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said, “Now, then, we should direct our efforts, as I understand it, to the 
 other representatives on the committee of four and see whether or not we are going 
 to get this hearing, inasmuch as it is to be unanimous?” Gov. Dunne interjected at 
 this point and said, “That would include calling upon Mr. Lloyd-George?” Mr. 
 Walsh said, “Not necessarily.” To the President Mr. Walsh said, “If we are not 
 allowed to meet you, how would you suggest that this or any similar matter could get 
 
838 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 before your Committee of Four?” “Well,” said the President, “I know of no way 
 except to take it up with them individually.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh said to the President, “Mr. President, when you uttered those words 
 declaring that all nations had a right to self-determination; that it was an issue that 
 had to be settled and once for all, and settled on the side of justice—those expressions 
 I have read to you—you voiced the aspirations of countless millions of people that had 
 been saying them to each other, and begging governments that oppressed them to 
 recognize them. When you, as the head of the most powerful nation in the world, 
 uttered them, and they received the assent of the representatives of all the nations, 
 it became a fact, Mr. President. These people are imbued with the principle. They 
 may be killed trying to vindicate it, but they can no longer be kept in subjection by 
 the action of diplomats, government officials, or even governments. They are free 
 now.” The President said: “You have touched on the great metaphysical tragedy 
 of to-day. My words have raised hope in the hearts of millions of people. It is my 
 wish that they have that; but could you imagine that you could revolutionize the 
 world at once, could you imagine that those peoples could come into that at once? ” 
 Mr. Walsh replied, “ I can imagine them, if anyone denied it, struggling to come into it 
 at once, if it were denied in the place where they expected they were to have it come 
 and to have it settled definitely once and for all. ” 
 
 The President said, “ When I gave utterance to those words, I said them without the 
 knowledge that nationalities existed, which are coming to us day after day. Of course, 
 Ireland’s case, from the point of view of population, from the point of view of the strug* 
 gle it has made, from the point of interest that it has excited in the world, and especi¬ 
 ally among our own people, whom I am anxious to serve, is the outstanding case of a 
 small nationality. You do not know and can not appreciate the anxieties that I have 
 experienced as the result of these many millions of people having their hopes raised 
 by what I have said. For instance, time after time I raise a question here in accord¬ 
 ance with these principles, and I am met with the statement that Great Britain or 
 France or some of the other countries have entered into a solemn treaty obligation. 
 I tell them but it was not in accord with justice and humanity; and then they tell 
 me that the breaking of treaties is what has brought on the greater part of the wars 
 that have been waged in the world. No one knows the feelings that are inside of 
 me while I am meeting with these people and discussing these things, and as these 
 things that have been said here go over and over in my mind I feel it most profoundly. 
 It distresses me. But I believe, as you gentlemen do, in Divine Providence, and I 
 am in His hands, and I don’t care what happens me individually. I believe these 
 things and I know that countless millions of other people believe them. ” 
 
 Gov. Dunne said: “Mr. President, do you know that the addresses made by us in 
 Ireland, which you say have given offense to the British authorities, were along these 
 lines: That we had enjoyed the blessings of a republican form of government in 
 America for many years, and that we had grown great and prosperous as a republic: 
 that we were pleased to note that they had in a fairly held election determined that 
 they desired a republican form of government, and that we congratulated them upon 
 their choice and hoped that their aspirations would be consummated, the very same 
 sentiments that we had always held and thought in America, and to which the people 
 of Ireland had responded?” 
 
 The President replied, “Yes, Gov. Dunne, but suppose that during our war of the 
 rebellion an Englishman had declared that the South had a right to secede, or sided 
 with the South, nobody would have criticized him for that; but suppose that he had 
 gone into the South while the rebellion was going on or immediately before the rebel¬ 
 lion, would not our Government have said that he was fomenting the rebellion?” 
 
 Gov. Dunne said: “There is no parallel here. Here is a people who, after the 
 armistice, held an election under the forms and securities of British law, and declared 
 for a republic, and I don’t believe the cases are in any way similar.” 
 
 Mr. Walsh then interjected: “If you are drawing that comparison between the 
 Southern States attempting the exercise of that called ‘the right of secession’ and the 
 case of Ireland, I am compelled to say, I do not see the parallel. Would you please 
 state in what way the cases are similar?” 
 
 Mr. Walsh continued: “Of course, Ireland has a separate nationality; it is a nation 
 that has always asserted its nationhood except when repressed by overwhelming 
 force,” and then asked the President where the parallel was. The President replied 
 that he did not say it was a parallel case. 
 
 Toward the close of the interview the President said: “I wish that you would 
 bear in mind that 1 came here with very high hopes of carrying out the principles 
 as they were laid down. I did not succeed in getting all I came after. I should say— 
 I should say that there was a great deal—no, I will put it this way—there were a lot 
 of things that I hoped for but did not get.” 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 839 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Now, when we went over there we expected to meet this 
 situation : The President had said this fight was for the right of small 
 nations to control their own lives and to govern themselves. He said 
 that the issue was not made by men or women, but was made by 
 events; that this principle was to apply to those whom we did not 
 like as well as to those whom we did like; that there was to be a peace 
 conference at the end of the war and that that conference was to 
 be composed not of diplomats, as such conferences had been before, 
 not of statesmen, not of governments, but of peoples through their 
 representatives; and so these people, meeting in race convention, a 
 homogenous people with their boundaries fixed by God himself, by 
 the sea, a people who had retained their culture through the cen¬ 
 turies, a people who had maintained their social institutions in spite 
 of all sorts of repression of armies of occupation, aye, may I say, a 
 people who shed their most precious blood at least once every genera¬ 
 tion in an attempt to repel the invader who was occupying their 
 country—these people met in race convention and sent us as their 
 representatives to the peace conference, and we believed that when 
 we got there we would find a conference of delegates. These people 
 had held a plebescite in December under the forms of English law, 
 under every disadvantage so far as they were concerned, and by 
 an overwhelming majority had agreed to come under these princi¬ 
 ples for which so many of our soldiers died. When they did it they 
 separated from England. They refused to go to Westminster. 
 
 They set up their own congress, and I want to say to you gentle¬ 
 men, because I speak here as an American of America, that I give 
 the American thought when I say as an American of Irish blood that 
 if the great test was put between America and any other nation upon 
 this earth, including the one for which we have so deep a sentimental 
 attachment, that we would see Ireland go to the fathomless depths 
 of the sea and disappear as compared to our own country, but I 
 want to say to you that when these men separated from England, 
 when this Irish people separated from England, they separated 
 forever. [Applause.] They have a volunteer army of 200,000 
 trained men, not well equipped, of course, but none will say in this 
 presence that they will not go out with their rude weapons and 
 fight to the death, because men are doing it in India, where women 
 and children are being bombed. They are doing it in Egypt, where 
 villages are being ravaged and people are being killed on the street. 
 They are doing it in 20 different countries among 20 different groups 
 at the very time that peace was signed. So we believed that under 
 the declaration of the President of the United States, when we would 
 present our case, we would show that Ireland came strictly within 
 the definition which he gave and that automatically Ireland would 
 have the right to self-determination. But we found no such body 
 in Paris. We found that 70 men or more had assembled there; that 
 immediately upon assembling they had abrogated all their rights. 
 
 They were like the minority stockholders in a corporation that 
 appointed a board of directors, and they appointed a board of 
 directors of 10. The main body had met only four times in session 
 up to the time we left Paris. They appointed a board of directors of 
 10. That board of directors appointed a committee of four. One 
 of them was found to have no influence and was set aside, so they 
 got down to a committee of three. We found that there was no small 
 
840 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 nation given a hearing before that board. We found that there was 
 no abstract right contended for by any small nation laid down as 
 the principle of action by that committee of three. And from now 
 on for the purposes of this argument we will call them the Big Three 
 instead of the Big Four. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. Were you present over there, Mr. 
 Walsh? . . 
 
 Mr. Walsii. Mr. Senator, I hung around the Hotel Crillon until 
 I wore out several pairs of shoes. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. I want the record to show that 
 you are speaking from persona] knowledge. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. I am speaking from personal knowledge, and I am 
 putting so much “ I ” m this case that I do not know whether I am 
 a witness or an advocate or what I am here; but I was there, and the 
 record shows at least the part that I took. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Will you be kind enough to let me ask you a 
 question ? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes, indeed, Senator. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Of how many people did this board of di¬ 
 rectors, as you call it, consist at the time you were corresponding 
 with them with a view of getting the case of Ireland laid before the 
 peace conference? 
 
 Mr. "Walsh. There were 10 of the board of directors, but it had 
 vanished down to 3. I am just giving my view of it, of course, as I 
 looked at it at first hand, in a sort of a way. We were Kansas City 
 and Chicago diplomats, not Parisian diplomats. We had to take it 
 as we glanced at it, and we found that committee of three. Of 
 course, Japan could have sat in there, but it was the joke of Paris, 
 “ What are the Japs going to do ?” The other members were wishing 
 to the Almighty that they would do something besides just sit there 
 and blink; but England had winked at Japan, of course. Japan 
 went in there under that broad plan, the equality of Nations, the 
 equal recognition of all nationals; but Japan already had her secret 
 treaty, she already had her understanding. She did not need to be 
 there. WTnat she wanted was to maintain her grasp on Korea and to 
 get Shantung. Of course she dropped out. She was well attended to. 
 
 Now, instead of dealing with small nations over there they dealt 
 with reparations, they dealt with indemnities, they divided up terri¬ 
 tories, they created new nationalities, some of them, I understand, by 
 mistake. They drew lines and sometimes did not know what country 
 some of these nationals were put into. Around that place were all 
 of these peoples trying to get a voice. I believe that had we had a 
 little more practical statesmanship we might have organized the 
 small nations of the world on the principles of the 14 points and 
 started out and won it for the world. I really do [applause] ; be¬ 
 cause the Lithuanians were there, the Arabians were there, the Chi¬ 
 nese were there, the Esthonians were there, the Georgia republicans 
 were there, the East Indians were there, and all the others were 
 there, They called at the headquarters of the American commission, 
 to find out from us what was the reason why the 14 points were not 
 being applied. So after they finished this work as far as it could be 
 finished—the departure of the President of the United States put an 
 end to it—we applied to the “ Big Three.” I am not going into our 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY* 
 
 841 
 
 correspondence, but I will say this, that they said that unofficially 
 they loved us, but officially they were ready to jump out of the win¬ 
 dow when we came in. I do not know what they were afraid of. 
 Surely they were not afraid of England. Let them look at Ireland. 
 Nine hundred soldiers held off 40,000 for over a week. Let them 
 look back to the history of our own country that fought so well 
 against unequal odds. Surely it was not fear. But as I say, un¬ 
 officially they loved us, but officially, I am sorry to say, I do not 
 believe they liked to see us come into the Crillon Hotel. 
 
 In the interviews which we are now to submit under the request 
 of this committee we will give the interviews that we had with all 
 these gentlemen. Our correspondence will show—I want to speak 
 plainly—how they dodged us. It would have been, I may say, more 
 agreeable to us and would have called for our admiration to a greater 
 extent if they had just said, “ We don’t want to have anything to 
 do with you*’; but they did not do that. They recognized us just 
 as far as they could unofficially, and we claim, of course, officially. 
 So when the thing broke up- 
 
 Senator Borah. Mr. Walsh, I suppose there must have been some 
 one, aside from the American delegation, that was objecting to your 
 being heard, was there not? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Oh, yes; let me tell you. Let me say this, Senator 
 Borah, as it will appear here, that we were prevented from being 
 heard by the representative of George V directly, for this reason, 
 because now as I study this covenant of the league I see many 
 angles that I did not see before, and I recall that when that com¬ 
 mittee of four went into session to settle the fate of the whole 
 world they agreed that they would not hear anyone except by 
 unanimous consent, and we were the people—that is, the representa¬ 
 tives of the Irish race; when I say “ we” I mean the representatives 
 of these other races—that had the great concern. 
 
 Now, when that committee adjourned by the departure of the 
 President, we for the first time got the league of nations. I say 
 here now, and I want to put it in this record, that that league of 
 nations was never assented to, even by the ones who signed it, in 
 the sense that we understand it. Anyone who was present at the 
 Quay d’Orsai when the covenant of the league of nations was so 
 splendidly and dramatically read by our President, and has seen 
 them jumping up all over the room, wanting to say a word—you 
 could not tell who they were—but Clemenceau, the lion of France, 
 blandly said, “There being no objection, the covenant of the league 
 is agreed to.” We used to have what we called mob primaries out 
 in Missouri, and I guess some of you gentlemen had them, where 
 the chair would recognize only one man to appoint a committee of 
 10 to bring in a list of delegates to attend the convention, and the 
 committee of 10 always returned with a list containing their own 
 names, and then the meeting adjourned. [Laughter.] 
 
 Senator Brandegee. You speak of these interviews you had. Did 
 you have a stenographer with you? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. No; we did not have a stenographer, but the minute 
 we came away, every time, we dictated to a stenographer what had 
 occurred in the conference; and in the last one, the one with the 
 President, I had a gentleman present who, of course, could be a 
 
842 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 witness, and there were two of us, Gov. Dunne and myself, and we 
 immediately dictated it, and I do not believe that there will be any 
 dispute about the facts. If so we would like to appear before this 
 committee again, and perhaps point out logically other things that 
 coincide exactly with what was said in that interview. 
 
 Now, as I say, I was for a league of nations such as I have tried 
 to set out here, but I was willing to take a bad league of nations. 
 I was whiling to take one that was not a good league of nations. 
 I had gotten the French thought—the thought of France—that this 
 is a rotten covenant for a league of nations; but it is not possible 
 to start unless you have some sort of a league, and you can not have 
 a robust and a good league by strangling it to death in infancy. 
 I had a good deal of that thought. I studied that league covenant 
 coming back on the boat, and having studied that league covenant 
 I say, so far as my limited capacity goes and my ability to under¬ 
 stand it, it is not a league of nations to prevent war, but it is a 
 league of nations to foment war; it is a league of nations to put 
 the shackles of injustice on almost half the people of the world; 
 to embroil us in wars and in contests such as our country has never 
 known before. 
 
 In order to be plain—it is with regret that I will send my 
 resignation to the League to Enforce Peace coincidentally with 
 the little effort I am making to-day—I hate to say it, but I sav 
 that that whole covenant of the league is so shot through with 
 injustice, that the subtle European minds have so covertly and 
 successfully planted their ideals in it in contradiction to the ideals 
 of the American people, that no interpretation and no amendment 
 can make it an honest document. [Applause.] 
 
 Now, if I may be indulged for a moment, about this league, we 
 have a certain concept. We have been reproached for being a 
 material people. Over there I saw a cartoon that hurt my feelings, 
 portraying America something like Davenport’s cartoons used to 
 do, with dollar marks all over Uncle Sam’s clothes. We have been 
 criticized for being chasers of the almighty dollar and for not 
 having the high spirit that ought to animate people. 
 
 Senator Knox. That cartoon represented the dollars they 
 wanted. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. It represented the dollars they wanted; very good. 
 But that criticism, as I say, is being made, Mr. Senator. Now 
 we have certain ideals. This Government was founded upon them. 
 We believe that the} 7 have not only been good for us, but they 
 have been good for the world. The great contribution that Presi¬ 
 dent Wilson made to this war was in his declaration upon going 
 into the war, in the addresses that he made to you gentlemen at 
 different times, and in public; because, as I had the privilege of 
 telling him, when he made those declarations of the right of every 
 man and women to control their own life destinies, he said what 
 was in the hearts and in the brains of countless millions of people— 
 all of them, practically, except the men who held mastery. He 
 declared principles for which thousands have died what might 
 otherwise have been ignominious deaths upon the scaffold, for 
 which countless millions have served time in jails and peniten¬ 
 tiaries; and are doing it, I may add, in Ireland to-day; and when 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 843 
 
 he did it, be gave utterance to the idea that set the world free. By 
 your action in the Senate of the United States you may cause 
 the butchery of many more thousands, but that ideal will live. The 
 people of the world have been made free, and they have been made 
 free by us; and if our temporary servants—or representatives, to 
 be more polite, because we have no rulers—forget those principles, 
 then by the strength of our intellects and by the power given by the 
 Constitution of the United States we will get new servants and 
 other representatives who will carry those principles to their final 
 consummation. [Applause.] 
 
 I will only try to urge the fundamentals of this plan. 
 
 Senator Fall. Mr. Chairman, I move that the time of the hear¬ 
 ing be extended indefinitely, until it is concluded. 
 
 Senator New. I second that motion. 
 
 Senator Fall. It is the first chance that the American people 
 have had for a hearing anywhere, as I understand, except m the 
 Senate. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I do not like to take the time. 
 
 Senator Fall. Go on. 
 
 Senator Moses. Let us have the question, Mr. Chairman. 
 
 Senator Borah. We have got 25 days. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I have all the rest of my life. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. And so have the rest of us, too. 
 
 Senator Moses. May we have a vote on this motion, Mr. Chair¬ 
 man? 
 
 Senator Fall. I make that motion that the time be extended 
 three hours—extended more, if necessary. 
 
 The Chairman. The motion is that the time be extended three 
 hours. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Before we vote on that let me ask- 
 
 The Chairman. I want to say to the committee that we arranged 
 to hear the Greeks to-day and to give them an hour, and as they 
 have come here from a long distance, I feel bound to give them 
 that hearing. 
 
 Senator Fall. The three hours additional need not necessarily bo 
 consecutive. They may take their hour and then we may continue 
 this hearing, which is very interesting to me. 
 
 The Chairman. Certainly. There is no need of a motion for 
 that. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I simply wanted to ask Judge Cohalan if he 
 wanted three hours more. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. We would like it very much. Mr. Ryan gave 
 way, and he has first-hand information. Gov. Dunne gave way. 
 We would like very much to give them an opportunity to be heard. 
 
 The Chairman. We can hear the Greeks this afternoon, but of 
 course it would involve a break in your hearing. We can take it up 
 later. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I am going to close as quickly as I possibly can. 
 There are a few things I would like to say yet. 
 
 The Chairman. Take your time, Mr. Walsh. The committee are 
 ready to hear you. [Applause.] 
 
 Senator Fall. Mr. Chairman, had we not better settle this by 
 voting on my motion for three hours’ additional hearing? Then 
 we can take a recess and hear the Greeks later. 
 
844 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 The Chairman. Certainly. I think we can give them all the time 
 they want. 
 
 Senator Fall. I will move to extend the time again, if they have 
 not completed. 
 
 The Chairman. The committee can arrange that. We have other 
 hearings, and of course we must maintain our engagements. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. We can run these hearings into 
 next week. 
 
 Senator Borah. We can go ahead, and if nobody calls time on 
 them, they will not need to stop. 
 
 Senator Fall. Nobody will call time on them. 
 
 The Chairman. I will try and make an arrangement with the 
 Greeks for their hearing in the meantime. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I will try as w T ell as I can to address myself to what 
 I call the fundamentals of this proposed covenant of the league of 
 nations, to give you if I can what is in my mind and what is in my 
 conscience, because I will say again what I feel impelled to say, that 
 this whole covenant of the league of nations is a perversion of what 
 the men who really favored a league of nations intended and wished 
 for. 
 
 Senator Harding. Before you get away from it, I would like to 
 have you emphasize and give us a little more light on one thing: 
 You expressed the surprise of the assembled commissioners over the 
 league when it was presented. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes. 
 
 Senator Harding. Was that marked? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Oh, it was very marked. They jumped up all over 
 the place to make protests. Man after man got up. You know 
 there was an awful censorship upon this whole business. We fol¬ 
 lowed the publicity very closely, on account of our own little em¬ 
 bassy over there. It was impossible at that time to get anything 
 about Ireland in a French paper. I am very happy to say that since 
 the Persian matter and since the developments at the White House 
 conference and other places a very distinctly different reaction is 
 going on in Paris. Our cable advisers tell us that the most reaction¬ 
 ary papers in Paris are in favor of the absolute independence of 
 Ireland, and think that Ireland was badly treated at the peace con¬ 
 ference, and looked to this Senate not to give any advice and never 
 to consent to the covenant of the league of nations as it is at present. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Will you allow mo to ask you a question? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. At the time this covenant was accepted by 
 the plenary conference was there any attempt to elucidate its pro¬ 
 visions, to explain the various provisions in it, or any debate upon it, 
 other than the formal set speeches of the heads of the nations which 
 presented it to the conference? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Not a particle. It had been presented before, and 
 there were some objections made to certain parts of it, and it went 
 back, and this meeting was called, and I talked to one of the most 
 powerful members of the conference outside of the Big Four. He is 
 a lawyer of very fine ability. As we are going in to have everything 
 open, I will say that it was Judge Doherty, of Canada, representing 
 the Dominion of Canada, and the night before he did not know 
 what was in it. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 845 
 
 Senator Moses. lie was one of the signatories to the treaty, was 
 he not ? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. He was a signatory to the treaty. 
 
 Senator Bran degee. I would like to have you or some other gen¬ 
 tleman who speaks for your side of the question state why this cove¬ 
 nant can not by amendment be made satisfactory. I understand you 
 to say that it is such a dishonest document that it can not be made 
 honest by amendment. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. Yes; I say that. I do not mean personal dishonesty. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I understand that. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I mean intellectually dishonest. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Such an undesirable thing for the United 
 States to agree to. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. Yes. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I want either you or some other gentleman 
 who addresses us to explain, in view of article 26, which provides 
 that amendments to this covenant shall take effect when ratified by 
 the members of the league whose representatives compose the coun¬ 
 cil, and by a majority of the members of the league whose repre¬ 
 sentatives compose the assembly, why under that article it can not 
 be amended satisfactorily. I ask you that question in view of the 
 fact that one of the strongest arguments contained in the letters 
 which I receive in favor of the covenant is that, although the cove¬ 
 nant has its imperfections, no human document can be expected to 
 be perfect when it originates, that the Constitution of the United 
 States was not perfect, and that it was afterwards amended very 
 quickly, and that therefore this league covenant can be amended 
 satisfactorily if we will only go into it. I want you to give your 
 reasons why you say it can not. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Very good; I will try to answer that, Senator. First, 
 I look upon this document in this way: It is either a thoroughgoing 
 fraud from beginning to end, to which a respectable nation should 
 not give its assent; it is either something gotten up intentionally and 
 deliberately to deceive, or else it has either the direct power or the 
 potential power to enforce every idea in it. That is my opinion of 
 this document. 
 
 I believe, if we surrender to this proposed covenant of the league 
 of nations, that in the very essentials of its structure, we can never 
 escape. 
 
 I begin by my opposition to article 10, and, as I suggested, not 
 limiting it as far as Ireland is concerned, but that it should apply to 
 any country that had the fate of the people in its hands, and had 
 determined the form of government under which it should live and 
 which government was oppressed by an army of occupation. I 
 think it could be amended. But as you go through this, as has been 
 said, 11 is just as bad as 10, and 12 is just as bad as 11, and you 
 go a little further and you will find that i3 is as bad as 11, because if 
 a dispute arose, and believe me, gentlemen, a dispute is going to arise 
 about Ireland mighty quickly, and a dispute is going to arise about 
 other matters as far as France is concerned, and if this committee 
 has the power—and this committee has the power if it is a fair docu¬ 
 ment and not a false document—it has the authority to lay down the 
 procedure from which we can never escape. And I took section 40 
 
846 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 of tlie annex, because my first criticism was answered by a gentle¬ 
 man very high in authority who said that this vote had to be unani¬ 
 mous, the vote of the assembly, but I found under section 40 of 
 the annex that a majority vote, a bare majority of the council, carries 
 any proposition w T ith it. And when it comes to arbitrament of these 
 nations, they know exactly what they want under this treaty, and 
 will never agree to arbitration, and it goes to this council stacked in 
 advance. 1 want to speak plainly—why? Because they have secret 
 agreements entered into and signed by the representatives of the 
 United States dividing territory, and unless the chairman has re¬ 
 ceived them since I heard the argument on the case of Egypt the 
 other day, they are still undisclosed to the separate branch of the 
 treaty-making power, the Senate of the United States, and certainly 
 not to our knowledge. 
 
 The Chairman. Most things connected with this treaty are un¬ 
 disclosed. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I would say now, if we are doing it all open, as soon 
 as you get the agreement mentioned by Senator Fall, that you send 
 it to us so that we may find out if Ireland is in it. 
 
 Senator Borah. You were speaking about article 40? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Article 40 of the annex. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. You have not the committee print? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I think I can find it. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Did you mean a majority of the council or 
 of the assembly. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. A majority vote of the council decides the whole 
 thing. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I wish you would read that provision. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. All right. I think I can find it. It is in the annex. 
 It is chapter 3, article 40. 
 
 Senator Moses. That relates to the Saar Valley. 
 
 The Chairman. Top of page 93, article 40, section 4. 
 
 Senator Swanson. That relates to the Saar Basin, section 4. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I think not, as I read it. Let us consider it, because 
 I tried to weigh it with great care, and I weighed this with reference 
 to what this council might interpret it to mean. Yow, the league 
 contains a great many of the ideals expressed by the President, but 
 still I will say that an analysis of that will show that in some place 
 there is something that points out that this is not a covenant that is 
 going to bring peace to the world. 
 
 I get this from the Congressional Record. We have the covenant 
 and then we have the annex. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Just give the page and the date of the Record. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Page 2479 of the Congressional Record of Thursday, 
 July 10, 1919. That was my first notion when I first read it, that it 
 referred to the Saar Valiev, but I do not believe that it does. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I want you to put it in the record of the 
 hearing of this committee. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I am going to put it in the record, and then try to 
 give you what follows, that makes me say that the interpretation of 
 this can be made to show' that it refers to the whole annex. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Take your time and find it. 
 
 Senator Borah. I suggest that the gentleman proceed and that 
 when he has time to look this up he can add it to his remarks. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 847 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes. 
 
 Senator Moses. In other words, he will present a brief on it? 
 
 Senator Borah. No; he can present his remarks. We will stay 
 here until he gets through. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Yes; I will find the clause in there, if that refers to 
 the whole annex, and I think it does. 
 
 Senator Swanson. If you will look at page 67 of the annex, it is 
 named “Annex.” Then it concludes. 
 
 On page 93, here is the way section 40 reads [reading] : 
 
 In all matters dealt with in the present annex the decision of the council of 
 the league of nations will he taken by a majority. 
 
 On page 67, if you will read through—it is named “Annex ”—it 
 shows that all that in the annex is limited to a majority. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. I did not so get it out of the Congressional Record. 
 
 I will try to come back to it. I took this Congressional Record in 
 my analysis and that is my conclusion. I will come back to that. 
 
 Now, then, to begin with, fundamentally I say that the setting up 
 of this assembly and council absolutely pushes us away not only 
 from the ideas of our government, but surrenders us in this way to 
 the conception of monarchy as opposed to a republican form of gov¬ 
 ernment. 
 
 We were present, as I say, in Paris. We w T ere there at the time 
 when all of the experts were resigning. We were there at the time 
 when all of Paris understood that the ideals for which we entered 
 the war had been circumvented. We were there and heard the secret 
 treaties discussed. We were there and heard not only the facts, but 
 the intelligent men and women from many of the struggling nation¬ 
 alities, and all of them drawing the point of departure from democ¬ 
 racy to autocracy or monarchy just as I am going to try to draw it 
 here. 
 
 We start with this council, which consists of the representative of 
 the American Republic, the minister of the King of England, the 
 minister of the King of Italy, the minister of the Emperor of Japan, 
 the minister of the King of Belgium, the minister of the King of 
 Spain, the minister of the King of the Helenes, and the representa¬ 
 tive of the Republic of France, essentially different in form, of 
 course, from our own, and the representative from the Republic of 
 Brazil. So we started out with a monarchical institution essentially 
 to pass upon all questions the council of the proposed league of na¬ 
 tions has the right to pass upon. 
 
 We find as we look through this treaty, first, that the nations ar© * 
 not disarmed. We find that we are entering into obligations our¬ 
 selves to increase our armament. We find that we are under a prac¬ 
 tical obligation to increase our armament fivefold. We find that 
 under the authority—and I am speaking of it now as absolute au¬ 
 thority—that this is a virile living thing that is intended to effectuate 
 its purpose, with all the influence and power that can be put behind 
 it by all of the powerful nations of the earth, and it is that sort of 
 institution. 
 
 Senator Harding. You have noted that the President has said that 
 wo really have no obligation except to pass upon the orders of tlio 
 council in accordance with the conception of justice. 
 
848 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. I have followed that, and in my slight study of meta¬ 
 physics, it is too deep for me. I read it over and over again and 
 tried to put it in the blunt way I have by saying that this is a docu¬ 
 ment of liberty and power or it is an essential fraud; that if we ad¬ 
 mit there is such a thing as international law, under international 
 law it must have all the force that any other agreement has between 
 nations, or it has not any at all. That is my conception of it, and I 
 give it for what it is worth. 
 
 Now as long as we are a powerful nation and as long as the signa¬ 
 tories with us have work to do for their kind of an imperialistic 
 character in the world, so long will they carry America along with 
 them. If we furnish the men, if we furnish the treasurer, if we 
 spill the blood—and it must be done at once, as I will try to show 
 before I leave my remarks—then we go along with our fellow im¬ 
 perialists and we are full imperialist criminals with them. But if 
 our one man on that league of nations decides that we will not go on, 
 then it will be found that we did not need this large army, that we 
 will drop under a pledge that we have made to allow the council to 
 set the quantity of disarmament or armament that may be had. We 
 will then drop down into a small armed country. Why? Because it 
 is not necessary to police our country. Why ? Because if we refuse as 
 a matter of fact to join with them in their imperialistic aggressions, 
 and they have the power under it to allow Germany—we conjure 
 hatred with that name of old, and so I mention it—if we admit 
 Germany afterwards into the league, then England could right away 
 have a standing army or navy to conquer any country that they de¬ 
 sired to keep under subjection or to place under subjection, while we 
 ■would have a small army if they disarmed us on land and disarmed 
 ns on sea, and we might have a navj? half as large as England’s, and 
 she could have a navy twice as large as she has at the present time. 
 
 And so I might go through this document. I will be glad to do 
 it. It can be done. But I know you gentlemen have done it. 
 
 I would do it if I had the power, which I doubt. 
 
 If this is not a covenant for a league of nations, what is it? Can 
 there be any dispute about it? It is a so-called covenant of a 
 league of nations proclaimed to the world, and honestly by its ad¬ 
 vocate—by its only advocate, who I believe has followed this thing 
 through, because there is a propaganda going on in this country 
 such as there never has been before. On Broadway, New York, I 
 heard a Government official connected with the Educational Depart¬ 
 ment in Washington. May I without offense to the gentleman say 
 that he has never read this league of nations covenant. But he had 
 a crowd around him and was speaking for it to the people of the 
 United States. I saw another man speaking for it and asking his 
 organization to indorse. I know this gentleman has not read it. 
 
 It is called a covenant of the league of nations. It is a catch¬ 
 word. It first caught my consciousness. It is a catch word, and 
 that will bring behind it those who abhor war and those who believe 
 that some start ought to be made with a league of nations. But 
 the truth ought to be written that it is a league to effectuate and 
 maintain permanently the divisions of territory, and the seizing of 
 the lives of men and women as contained in secret treaties about 
 which the President of the United States knew nothing when ho 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 849 
 
 made these utterances, about which lie knew nothing when he went 
 to Paris, and about which we knew nothing, and for the upholding 
 and maintaining of the principles of which 300,000 of our men were 
 killed, gassed, and wounded in foreign lands, which can not be denied 
 here. I have read the questions asked by Senators Borah and John¬ 
 son. It is in the minds of all of you that when that Big Three 
 sat, there were three dominating thoughts. One was a man of ideals, 
 of honest ideals. I say that 1 believe that if our President could 
 have come back to this country with every one of them put in force, 
 his heart’s greatest desire would have been met. I believe that. But 
 when he got there, as he expressed it, he had in mind all of the 
 principles for which we had gone to war, an end of secret diplomacy, 
 an end of back-door intrigue, an end of the power of one man to 
 get into a squabble with another and call to arms millions of people, 
 the young manhood of the country that he happens to represent, 
 that there was to be an end to this thing of dividing territory re¬ 
 gardless of the wishes of the people, that always and ever the rights 
 of nationalities were to be considered, that always and ever no man 
 hereafter should have a government imposed upon him-that his 
 conscience did not approve of, but he found that secret treaties had 
 been made absolutely abrogating every one of his 14 points. What 
 became of the freedom of the seas? 
 
 The recognition, if you give it, and I trust in God you will not, 
 to England’s protectorate over Egypt means that England takes 
 Turkey’s right to the Suez Canal; means, if I conjure the thought 
 correctly, that it gives England a grip on every quart of salt water 
 in the world; this country, attempting to enforce ideals, laying 
 down what is contained in some parts of the present proposed league 
 of peace, the present covenant. On the other hand, what do we 
 have? I must state it plainly. I do not believe from my observation 
 that the French people as a people have imperialistic aims. You 
 can not get the thought or the reaction I believe that would con¬ 
 vince you of that. At any rate, I believe that so intent were they 
 particularly upon getting reparation for the devastation of their 
 country, so anxious w T ere they to have guaranties for their future 
 protection, and so insistent was this demand, that it became, as the 
 President said, a state of mind, and nothing else so far as France 
 was concerned could be considered; and so all the press of France 
 sounded that one note; and so everything was censored that might 
 have anything to do with the enforcement of our ideals as expressed 
 in the messages to Congress, in the writings and speeches of the 
 President. 
 
 On the other hand was the representative of the King of Great 
 Britain, Mr. Lloyd-George. He held his eyes to high heaven and 
 said that England had no imperialistic aim in the war; that they 
 did not propose to gain 1 yard of territory. And when they were 
 urging us into the "war, you remember how he denounced—how Mr. 
 Asquith denounced—what they called the lie of the enemy, that 
 they had any desire for any territorial aggrandizement. But Mr. 
 Lloyd-George was there, and there for that purpose alone. He 
 emerged with his mandatories or with his protectorates or whatever 
 you call them; and I point to them and I point to Egypt and I point 
 
850 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 to Ireland, and I say, whatever they call them, they are always the 
 same—and I say that at the very foundation of it, it is the desire and 
 the purpose to economically subject the people of those countries; 
 to keep them in practical slavery—the producing masses of those 
 countries. The people who produce the cotton in Egypt are not 
 allowed to manufacture the goods into textiles in their own country, 
 but are compelled to send the raw material to England. If England 
 did not get that economic advantage, as they have in Ireland and as 
 they have in every country into which they have gone, she would 
 have no concern in going in there. 
 
 I have no hatred of England. I am proud of her achievements 
 where they have been good. But I say in the very genesis of the im¬ 
 perialist idea is corruption, the very thought of holding their people 
 for economic advantage is, governmentally and internationally, if 
 you enter into it, dishonesty. 
 
 Now, then, she emerged with an added control over something like 
 33,000,000 people, with an area in land, and valuable land, gold mines, 
 diamond mines, the richest agricultural land existing in the world, in 
 her own bag. Did she do it honestly and fairly? Can any league 
 be a good league that has this honestly as its genesis? Was it fair, I 
 ask—was it fair, gentlemen of this committee, let me ask—to take the 
 lives of our 300,000 men or to cripple them; was it right to accept our 
 aid under the declaration we made; was it right to accept our aid 
 after Lloycl-George and Asquith had declared that they wanted no 
 more territory, when they absolutely had the obligation so far as it 
 could be international to hold that territory, and when they had in 
 their minds that they would do exactly what they did do with the 
 representative of the United States—that instead of following out 
 the principles for which we entered the war they would get an agree¬ 
 ment including among its signatories our powerful country, with its 
 great resources, to effectuate and to keep forever what they had 
 already gotten, a territory five times larger than the thirteen original 
 States of the United States ? As I say, I do not care what they call 
 it, a mandatory or what not; they have it, and by force of arms and 
 by the help what they think we can give them, they are going to 
 keep it. 
 
 I would like at this point to try to direct a few observations, that 
 may again be an answer to what Senator Brandegee asked, as to 
 the constitution, the constituent elements, of this league of nations, 
 and the way it is being gotten up. Some place in the world there 
 is a committee of seven men. I do not know whether there is a 
 democrat upon it—I mean democrat in its wide sense. I do not 
 know whether there is a man on it that belieyes in the representative 
 form of government. Has this committee been given a name—a 
 committee to organize a league of nations? Very well, some place 
 there is a committee sitting in the world. It may consist- 
 
 Senator Johnson. Did anybody on this committee know that that 
 authority had been given? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I think Senator Fall knew it. 
 
 Senator Fall. I knew it. 
 
 The Chairman. When I shook my head, I meant that I did not 
 know the names. We know some of the people on it by reference to 
 the newspapers. 
 
3MIEATY OF PEACE WITBT GERMANY. 851 
 
 Mr. W alsii. I have observed them. They all have been published. 
 
 The Chairman. Not to mv knowledge. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Some place sitting in the'world there is a committee 
 whose personnel is unknown in toto to the chairman of the Foreign 
 Relations Committee. That committee has this important duty, if 
 vou do not know- 
 
 V 
 
 Senator Fall. Among its other duties, it has to control the agenda. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. They not only put down the primary organization, 
 but they named the agenda for the first meeting. 
 
 The Chairman. And they also arranged the personnel and the 
 officers of the league. 
 
 Mr. Walsii. They have gone even further than that, anticipating 
 that the Senate would not perform its duty under the Constitution 
 and advise against this if they thought that it was wrong. You 
 will refuse to give your consent to it if you believe as I do about it. 
 Anticipating that, Sir Eric Drummond was appointed first secre¬ 
 tary general. 
 
 I want to say to you gentlemen who, I know, have had large experi¬ 
 ence in constituting boards and bodies, that a general secretary with 
 the power that Sir Eric Drummond has, will have more influence upon 
 the conduct of that board than will a majority of the members. I 
 say that because he has the ability to and he will make the suggestions 
 as to the agendum. He is the one who will receive the protests of 
 people who claim they are being subjected or repressed. He is the 
 one at first hand who passes primarily upon every act that that com¬ 
 mittee will be called upon to perform. So I say, knowing the little 
 that I do about constituting boards, and in cases where they are 
 brought from different parts of our own country, that a general sec¬ 
 retary of a board composed of different-speaking people from all 
 over the world is the man who will control that bod}^, practically, 
 if not absolutely. 
 
 At the present time there are peoples subject to restrictions in all of 
 the countries of the world. As I heard detailed to you the other day, 
 the officers of the Government of Egypt have the right, so far as I 
 can see, to be diplomatically represented in this or any other nation 
 on earth. They showed me their papers, and they came from their 
 own State Department, and they did not need to be viseed by Great 
 Britain. They came to Paris. They were shocked when they came 
 there to find that two days before they arrived the President of the 
 United States had given out an interview in which he recognized.the 
 protectorate of England over Egypt, and adjured the people of 
 Egypt not to commit any violence or do anything that would cause 
 pain and suffering to the inhabitants. And these men, precluded 
 from any effort to get into the conference, spent the balance of their 
 time attempting to see the President of the United States, and before 
 he left he advised Saad Pasha Zagloul that it would be impossible on 
 account of lack of time to see him. This covenant is set up under the 
 direction of Sir Eric Drummond in the United States. How is Saad 
 Pasha Zagloul to come in? How is he to get in the building when he 
 could not get in the country? 
 
 A Bystander. How did the Irish get in? 
 
 Mr. Walsh. Because the Irish people had the spirit, because those 
 Irishmen knew the genius of our country, knew that no mere pro¬ 
 hibitory law with reference to criminals could keep a man out of 
 
 135549°—19-7 
 
852 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 there who was making a fight for liberty. That is how ole Valera got 
 in. That is the spirit that brought him in. The people of Ireland 
 have representativ.es. They-have sent their envoys, sent by the regu¬ 
 lar government of Ireland, to Paris. They have to go there on some 
 specious plea or on disregard for some restrictive statute or ordi¬ 
 nance or regulation. The Egyptians are a great people. There are 
 many millions of people there crying out against the dominion 
 which they despise, in order to come into the league of nations. 
 Plow did they get into the building? The answer is how did they get 
 into the country? I have said, and I say again, that there should be 
 no pretense that we are going to hear anyone or that we are going to 
 have any part in European affairs if the right of every decent man 
 to come and go freely across the earth’s surface is not accorded to 
 him, holding him strictly amenable to the laws of every country in 
 which he mav be, whether those laws are to his liking, good or bad. 
 But we can not talk about having an international body where we 
 have restrictive laws that would keep the men that are trying to get 
 a voice for their people from freely attending the place where the 
 conference is to be held. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, and Senators, this question, of course, to my mind, 
 is not an Irish question. I want to say to you that the people of 
 Ireland are better acquainted with our laws and our customs and the 
 interpretation of our constitution than any other people on earth, 
 and I say that without boasting, and they are convinced that this 
 league of nations would not only not furnish them any help, but 
 would be absolutely destructive to their efforts for independence, and 
 that they would not get their independence at all until the next war 
 between half and half of the world was settled and democracy 
 finally triumphs. That is the answer to the question. 
 
 What did we find there? We went through Ireland; we visited it. 
 They have separated from England. They have set up a government 
 of their own. There is an English censorship that does not allow 
 news to get out.. We got there, and what happened in Ireland? We 
 have it in that blue book, Gov. Dunne and myself. It can be backed 
 up by a wealth of evidence that will make every assertion so clear 
 that even Mr. McPherson, the chief secretary for Ireland, could not 
 deny it. We challenged them to appoint a committee of their own 
 to investigate conditions in Ireland. Why? Not that we would 
 embroil the United States in any contest that Ireland is having, but 
 in order that you may do nothing that will make the chains stronger 
 upon Ireland. 
 
 Senator Bran degee. Did you read the speech that Senator Walsh, 
 of Montana, made in the Senate the other day, in which he claimed 
 that the only hope for the Irish cause was in the league of nations. 
 
 Mr. Walsh. I did not have the pleasure of reading that. There 
 is so much being published now that I can not read it all, but I say 
 this: I respectfully differ from the conclusions arrived at by Senator 
 Walsh. As I say, I just came from Ireland. Those are intelligent 
 people over there. We have referred to the small nations, and I say 
 that it warms my American heart to see the way those people 
 clamored around our headquarters. It was a sort of headquarters 
 for the oppressed people of the earth. They have an idea that the 
 President’s 14 points are absolutely in the hearts of our people. They 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 853 
 
 have an idea, and have it very strongly, that in some way there is 
 some power that is never going to allow this division of territory to 
 be made. So we met these people; some of them splendid people. 
 They are called backward and subject peoples, and small, and all 
 those diminutive names. We found a state of war going on in Ire¬ 
 land. They have a volunteer army of 200,000. They have their 
 officers. They drill daily, practically all of them are mobilized, and 
 they have their maneuvers. The effort to repress them is an effort of 
 force. We ought to understand this thing and look at it plain!v. 
 We heard about the so-called murders, and I shall try to classify 
 them. Reference has been made to the constables. They are not 
 constables such as we know. They are members of a standing army. 
 The} r carry rifles, and they drill with rifles. They have machine guns. 
 They live in barracks as soldiers do. They are never residents of the 
 community in which they operate as constables. So they are soldiers. 
 They act under the direct command of the commander in chief of the 
 English army of occupation in Ireland. They took prisoners, the 
 prisoners they took are republican volunteer soldiers and they were 
 taken not as assassins, but in broad daylight, in the large cities of 
 Ireland. 
 
 These men met them, and they met them in a way which, if war 
 was declared and it was our country, because of the fight they made 
 against unequal odds, they would be entitled to a medal from the 
 Congress of the United States. They retake the prisoners of the 
 English army. In taking them, if they have to do it, they kill the 
 soldiers of the army of occupation, of course, and the soldiers of the 
 army of occupation try to kill them. Is it a state of war? There 
 is the most crimeless country in the world. There is jail after jail, 
 built to hold a thousand men, with 10 common-law prisoners in 
 them, misdemeanants, or men charged with felony, and hundreds 
 of men charged with nothing but being republicans. Are they 
 criminals? These fights and flurries at arms take place in the 
 large cities in Ireland. The Irish people retake their prisoners and 
 take them away—in one case with 10,000 people looking on. These 
 people are their soldiers and their heroes. They protect them and 
 they fight for them because they say that a battle is going on. Tlio 
 English army is in Ireland to-day with every device of death 
 immediately at command. I saw them build the emplacements upon 
 which the machine guns are now firmly fixed, covering Liberty Hall 
 in Dublin, so as to send a deathly fire into the headquarters of the 
 national labor organization of Ireland. And why? Because I say 
 those men, the most conservative labor organization in the world, 
 going along lines approved of by all men, are likewise republicans, 
 and instead of treating them as citizens they treat them as criminals. 
 Those jails were created. We saw men confined in those jails that 
 would compare with the gentlemen whom I have the honor to ad¬ 
 dress this morning, as lawyers. 
 
 We saw newspaper men there, Senator Johnson, who compare 
 most favorably with any that you know in California or with the 
 very best that I have known, who own and edit their own news¬ 
 papers. We saw men who have devoted a lifetime to doing some¬ 
 thing for the people whom they represent—members of the Irish 
 Parliament—in solitary confinement. We saw the cells in which 
 
854 
 
 TEE AT Y OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 they had been confined. They were taken out of them the night 
 before, we were advised, but we saw the underground cells in which 
 they were kept in solitary confinement, and when we asked the 
 question of the governor of the jail, or made the assertion at 
 Mount Joy, he did not deity it. We heard the story at first hand of 
 the statement of the women, young and old, those whom I met, and 
 from whose lips I heard the story which I would not undertake in 
 this presence to detail because of its loathsomeness. I heard that 
 story from the lips of women as refined, as virtuous, as intellectual 
 as your wife and daughter and mine, and I can pay them no higher 
 compliment; and what I say is going on all through Ireland to-day. 
 
 Talk about bolshevists! Property is absolutely unsafe in Ireland. 
 Raids are made on private residences and thousands of dollars’ 
 worth of property are being taken, and not even what they call con¬ 
 traband. Every excess that applies to an army engaged especially 
 in an unjust war is being practiced upon the Irish people. Thou¬ 
 sands of dollars of ordinary mercantile establishments are taken 
 away. Everything is done to break the spirit of those people. Yet 
 we are asked to show that at a time a commission is undertaking to 
 establish peace they are trying to pass this covenant, intended, as 
 they claim, to prevent war, while a state of war actually exists in 
 Ireland and in other countries, and at this very time they refuse to 
 listen to the Irish people. 
 
 We are here to state to you, gentlemen, that if this league in its 
 present form is consented to by the Senate, 200,000 men, according to 
 their own statement—because I speak only by what they say—stand 
 ready to-da}^ before the world to bring America back to the ideals 
 which it has always preserved. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I will now ask 
 Mr. Michael J. R 3 T an, of Philadelphia, another one of the commis¬ 
 sioners, to come forward and tell his experiences in Paris. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ME. MICHAEL J. RYAN. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Mr. Ryan, before you begin, I think I should 
 suggest to the other members of the committee that the Sergeant at 
 Arms of the Senate has sent for us to come and make a quorum. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Why, we have the permission of the Senate 
 to sit during the sessions of the Senate. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Well, we can not break up a quorum. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. We have permission to sit here. 
 
 Senator Boraii. Tell them to adjourn. 
 
 The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Ryan. 
 
 Mr. Ryan. Mr. Chairman, I have been asked by the chairman of 
 our conference to participate in a departure from our program upon 
 which we agreed this morning. It was then contemplated that Mr. 
 Walsh should speak, and then that the governor of New Hampshire 
 and the lieutenant governor of Montana should be heard, and that 
 the closing argument upon the legal propositions advanced by the 
 committee should be made by Mr. Bourke Cockran, to whom I am 
 sure it will be a delight for all of us to listen. I am asked merely 
 to rise for a moment and give an experience. I understand that 
 some of you have asked that those who visited Paris should make a 
 little statement. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 855 
 
 We reached Paris—Mr. Walsh, Gov. Dunne, and myself—on the 
 12th or 13th of April. We immediately sought an interview with 
 the President of the United States. We joined in a letter which 
 appears as the first communication signed by the three of us, ad¬ 
 dressed to the President, asking for an interview. We set forth 
 the purpose of our coming, to wit, that safe-conduct should be 
 granted to Eamonn de Valera, the president of the Irish republic, 
 Arthur Griffith, and George Noble, Count Plunkett, to Paris from 
 Dublin, so that they might present the cause of Ireland. We have 
 set it forth on page 2 of the document that is now filed with each of 
 you. Some days afterwards, the President, through his secretary, 
 caused a communication to be sent to Mr. Walsh, asking Mr. Walsh 
 alone to visit him, which he did. We were then referred to Col. 
 House, and our communications during my entire stay in Paris were 
 with Col. House. I left Paris on the 24th of May, and I left wdien 
 we learned the attitude, as will be discerned from the communica¬ 
 tion printed in the pamphlet to which I have heretofore referred, 
 signed by Robert Lansing, in which he says: 
 
 I regret to inform you that the American representatives feel that any further 
 efforts on their part connected with this matter would be futile and, therefore, 
 unwise. 
 
 Col. House I had never seen, nor had I read much of him. I 
 belong to the party, as Senator Knox knows, of which President 
 Wilson is the official head, and I confess that I was curious to meet 
 the great Col. House. He undoubtedly treated us most splendidly, 
 and he deserves all of the commendation given to him in respect to 
 smoothness and velvetness of character, and I doubt whether wo 
 could at all find fault w T ith the kindliness and courtesy extended to 
 us b}^ him. 
 
 I have listened to a summary of the proceedings of the peace con¬ 
 ference, and I would confirm that from our knowledge of that which 
 took place in Paris, with this detail. I think we were all three informed 
 by the chairman of the subcommittee, to whom was theoretically 
 allotted the preparation of the league of nations draft, that the 
 perfected instrument was handed to him with instructions to present 
 it within 10 minutes. 
 
 Senator Fall. Who was that? 
 
 Mr. Ryan. I would rather not now state. I shall probably in¬ 
 form you later on in the day after a conference with our people. 
 
 Senator Fall. We would like to know. 
 
 Mr. Ryan. I am sure you would. And the draft was read. There 
 was no debate upon it. After its reading, the first man to interrupt 
 was the representative from Japan, who stated that it had been his 
 intention to present the question of race equality, but that he waived 
 it for the time without withdrawing it, or without being misunder¬ 
 stood as asserting it. The representatives of Belgium arose and 
 stated that they had hoped in view of Belgium’s sufferings that 
 Brussels would have been selected as the permanent place of meeting 
 rather than Geneva. Some representatives of the South American 
 Republics rose up, and then Chairman Clemenceau stated that there 
 being no further objections, the league of nations was # adopted. 
 There "was no roll call, and those of us who had heard of it, envied 
 the skill with which it was handled and adopted, and we marveled 
 at it all. 
 
856 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Senator Borah. Is there any difference between the steam roller 
 in Paris and in the United States? 
 
 Mr. Ryan. No; we regarded it with admiration. Some of us had 
 had experience in Kansas City, in Chicago, and Philadelphia, and 
 we thought that we had learned much in France which we might use 
 profitably in America. At the last interview that I had together with 
 my colleagues, with Col. House, the suggestion was made that wo 
 might present that which we had—our cause—to three of the Ameri¬ 
 can commissioners. We demurred. He then added that he would 
 join in hearing us. We were jocular with him, and as I say, every¬ 
 thing was exceedingly pleasant. He was most courteous, and we 
 suggested and he joined in the suggestion, that it would be a great 
 pleasure to listen to us upon the Irish question, that he could join 
 three of his colleagues. There was a suggestion that we ought to have 
 the President, and I am very positive that he said that the five com¬ 
 missioners had never met, the five American representatives had 
 never met to consider any question. I mention these things hesi¬ 
 tatingly, but at the urging of Judge Cohalan, with the thought that 
 they might be makeweights in the scale, to show to you men the 
 direct absence of consideration of the peoples pressing for hearings, 
 who sought to be resurrected into nations. 
 
 The interview which you have ordered to be printed, which took 
 place wfith the President after I had gone, showed some of the 
 reasons moving the President for his conduct, because he there 
 asserts that it was agreed that no hearings should be given to any 
 representatives of any small nations, without the consent of the 
 entire Big Four. Of course unanimous consent could not be ob¬ 
 tained. You Senators heard the cause of Egypt presented yester¬ 
 day. It was to me a sad spectacle to see 20 men, magnificent in their 
 manhood—for, being somewhat undersized myself, I look with ad¬ 
 miration upon a 6-footer—treated in such fashion by the Paris con¬ 
 ference. Of those 20 magnificent specimens of Egyptian manhood 
 the chairman alone did not speak English. All of the others spoke 
 many tongues, and it is curious that at least two of them, and I think 
 perhaps three, spoke Gaelic, although neither Mr. Walsh, Mr. Dunne, 
 nor Mr. Pyan speak a word of Gaelic. These men have been students 
 at various universities, and those of whom I speak specifically had 
 studied medicine in Dublin. They were at Paris, gentlemen, able 
 men, asking for a hearing, and a hearing was denied them. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Do I understand you to say that you were 
 informed by the President that no hearings could be had of the 
 smaller nations except by the unanimous consent of the Big Four? 
 
 Mr. Ryan. I was not present, but I read the interview, which you 
 have given permission to print, and that statement there appears. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. What I want to get at is this: Does this 
 interview show whether the President stated whether he had made 
 the request for unanimous consent that hearings be accorded them? 
 
 Mr. RyaNj I do not think so. I do not think he had made that 
 request. In fact, I think you can see that from Mr. Lansing’s letter, 
 and upon the receipt of that letter I came to this country, believing 
 that our hope lay more in America than in Paris. He writes- 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Who writes? 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 857 
 
 Mr. Ryan. Robert Lansing. This is a letter addressed to Hon. 
 Frank P. Walsh, and it appears on page 10 of the pamphlet to 
 which I have heretofore referred. We addressed a letter to the 
 President on May 22, 1919, asking that the communication which we 
 inclosed be transmitted to Monsieur Clemenceau, president of the 
 peace conference, which letter will be found on page 8 of the 
 pamphlet heretofore referred to. I wish now to read the reply to 
 that letter which is signed by Robert Lansing, and which appears, 
 as 1 say, on page 10 of the pamphlet heretofore referred to. The 
 letter is as follows: 
 
 American Commission to Negotiate Peace, 
 
 Hotel de Crillon, Paris , May 2 4, 1919. 
 
 Sir: I have received the letter which you and Messrs. Dunne and Ryan 
 addressed to me on May 1G regarding the issuing of safe conducts by the 
 British Government to Eamon de Valera, Arthur Griffith, and George Noble 
 Count Plunkett, in order that they may proceed from Ireland to France and 
 return, and I immediately took steps to acquaint myself with the facts of the 
 case, which transpired before the matter was brought to my attention by your 
 above-mentioned letter. 
 
 I am informed that when the question of approaching the British authorities 
 with a view to procuring the safe conducts in question was first considered, 
 every effort was made in an informal v/ay to bring you into friendly touch with 
 the British representatives here, although owing to the nature of the case it was 
 not possible to treat the matter officially. The British authorities having con¬ 
 sented that you and your colleagues should visit England and Ireland although 
 your passports were only good for France, every facility w T as given to you to 
 make the journey. Before your return to Paris, however, reports were received 
 of certain utterances made by you and your colleagues during your visit to 
 Ireland. These utterances, whatever they may have been, gave, as I am in¬ 
 formed, the deepest offense to those persons with whom you were seeking to 
 deal and consequently it seemed useless to make any further effort in connec¬ 
 tion with the request which you desired to make. In view of the situation 
 thus created, I regret to inform you that the American representatives feel that 
 any further efforts on their part connected with this matter would be futile and 
 therefore unwise. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 Robert Lansing. 
 
 In this correspondence you will find that my colleagues challenge 
 the point that we had given utterance to any thought which gave 
 offense to anyone. We went to Ireland at the request of the repre¬ 
 sentatives of the Irish people and with the consent of Mr. Lloyd- 
 George. Our passports were amended, mine and Mr. Walsh’s, upon 
 the application of the President of the United States. Gov. Dunne 
 had the additional distinction, appearing in the record, of his pass¬ 
 port having been amended upon the application of the President and 
 Mr. Lloyd-George. Why this signal honor was given to him I do 
 not know. Probably the typewriter slipped up on the other two. 
 
 Senator Knox. Amended in what respect? 
 
 Mr. Ryan. In this respect. We made application when we went 
 to Europe for France alone, for Paris. We did not contemplate a 
 visit to Ireland. When we reached there suggestions w T ere made to 
 us of meetings and time was being lost, and in the meantime we w T ero 
 invited to go to Ireland. We then sought to have our passports 
 changed, and they were changed forthwith, although the State Office 
 said that such a thing had never happened, that it would take at least 
 three weeks by cable to effect the change. Nevertheless, they were 
 changed within an hour and a half and delivered to us; changed after 
 that message had been received from the State Department. We did 
 
858 
 
 TEE AT Y OF PEACE WITH GEKMAITY. 
 
 go to Ireland, and we saw the conditions detailed there. We visited 
 all parts of Ireland. 
 
 At the request of the representatives of Lloyd-George, Gov. Dunne 
 and I visited Belfast, at the request of Sir William Wiseman, the 
 liaison officer between the two Governments. We visited all parts 
 of Ireland, and the conditions portrtiyed by our chairman are ex¬ 
 actly as portrayed. They present to different minds, of course, dif¬ 
 ferent phases, but you have a people there united to a degree un¬ 
 paralleled in their history. I have been connected with the Irish 
 movement during all of my life. There has never been such unanim¬ 
 ity among the Irish people, and there has never been such a unani¬ 
 mous desire for their recognition upon the part of the people of 
 Irish blood in the United States. I do not care what official 
 place men may hold, through whose veins flow Irish blood, 
 when they seek to uphold this tyrannous production, then I say 
 they fly in the face of the desires and the hopes of the Irish people. 
 We are one in this matter as never before in our history. I never saw 
 Ireland until I saw it in May of this year. They are a wondrous 
 people, a kindly people, yearning, yearning for betterment. By 
 every test that the President meted out, they have met the require¬ 
 ments. Under the forms of British law, 79 representatives are 
 hostile to English rule out of an elected 101. Seventy-nine out of one 
 hundred and one. Seventy-three of those seventy-nine were elected 
 as ultrarepublicans, saying they would not sit in the British House 
 of Commons if chosen, and upon that platform they were chosen. 
 There was division among the people, because large masses of 
 them who are what are called nationalists still believed there was no 
 hope for a republic. Therefore they didived their vote. Men there 
 say that upon a plebescite, the nation, four to one at least, would vote 
 for an Irish republic. All Provinces in Ireland are as one. For 30 
 vears, may I call to the attention of Senators, every one of the four 
 ^Provinces in Ireland has been a nationalist Province. 
 
 For 30 years 17 out of the 33 representatives from Ulster have 
 been Nationalists. When men speak of this Ulster question and say 
 that it indicates hostility to the aspirations of the rest of Ireland, 
 they speak in ignorance of the history of Ulster. The best blood of 
 Ulster, the people of Ulster, have been the radical revolutionists 
 of Ireland. The united Irishmen who first proclaimed and sought 
 the establishment of a republic—that movement was originated by 
 the Ulster men, not Catholics, in 1792. The greatest name in Irish 
 history, the one most loved, the one to whom the hearts of the 
 people go out in greatest enthusiasm, was the founder of that organi¬ 
 zation, Theobald Wolfe Tone, the man who died in the rebellion of 
 1798 with the Ulster Protestants. And need I say to you that 
 Robert Emmet was also a Protestant, though not an Ulster man. 
 Those of you who walk along lower Broadway in New York City 
 w T ill see as you come up to Cortland street, at St. Paul’s Church, two 
 great monuments, higher than from floor to ceiling of this room, 
 one telling of the life of the brother of Robert Emmet, the brother 
 who, fleeing from imprisonment, sought refuge in New York and 
 became its attorney general and one of the leaders of the American 
 bar. 
 
 The other is a monument of like character to Dr. McNevin, who 
 rose to the head of American physicians in the early days of the 
 
TREATY OF FEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 859 
 
 nineteenth century. These men are t} 7 pical of the long roll of 
 Ulster men who fought and died for Ireland. Why, Senator Knox, 
 your Pittsburgh district is filled with the names of the Pattons and 
 men of that character whose ancestors died in Ireland battling 
 against British tyranny. They gave to Pennsylvania so many of its 
 names, Coleraine, Donegal, Tyrone, and Dungannon, all resplendent 
 in its history. Those men brought these old names to their new 
 homes, and they helped to make that great American Commonwealth. 
 They reached out away beyond the Alleghenies, and they peopled the 
 West, and I doubt not the ancestors of many of you were of that 
 glorious strain. There is no religious question in this Irish move¬ 
 ment. Excepting O’Connell and Redmond, in the whole long lino 
 of Ireland’s history, when we call the roll of her mighty men, there 
 were only two or three Catholics. I mean in the last 150 years. Moli- 
 neaux and Swift and Wood and Grattan and Emmet, and Thomas 
 Davis, the National poet, Archibald Hamilton, Rowan and Curran, 
 and John Mitchell and Parnell in our own day. The men who make 
 up this splendid body of idealists, even though their writs run to no 
 foot of land, these men have been animated by a holy hope for liberty. 
 All three of us who went to Paris—Dunne, Ryan, and Walsh—were 
 born in this country. All our interests are here. The dust of our 
 fathers and the bones of our children are alike buried in America. 
 We love America above all other nations; three of my household 
 went into this war. 
 
 One of my kin is dead at Chateau-Thierry. I looked for his grave 
 over there. The French Government conducted me and Gov. Dunne 
 to find that grave. Our kin entered this war believing that the 
 United States meant what it said, that the right of self-determination 
 should be given to all peoples, and the Irish, no matter what their 
 feelings were that no war should have been declared, when this Con¬ 
 gress spoke they rallied to a man; they poured forth their blood and 
 their treasure, whether from Massachusetts or Missouri or Pennsyl¬ 
 vania or California. Wherever it might be, the Irish rallied to the 
 cause of the Stars and Stripes; and I beg of you Senators to exercise 
 your rights and keep the pledged faith of America. Keep troth to the 
 living and to the dead, and save this Nation and save our sons from 
 engaging in wars to which neither the conscience nor the Congress of 
 the United States shall give its assent, by defeating this treaty. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 Those men brought these old names to their new homes, and they 
 helped to make that great American Commonwealth. They reached 
 out away beyond the Alleghenies, and they peopled the West, and 
 I doubt not the ancestors of many of you were of that glorious 
 strain. There is no religious issue in this Irish movement. Except¬ 
 ing O’Connell and Redmond, in the whole long line of Ireland ’3 
 history, when we call the roll of leaders of her mighty men, there 
 were few Catholics—I mean in the last 150 years. Molineaux and 
 Swift, and Grattan and Emmet, and Archibald Hamilton Rowan, 
 and Curran and John Mitchell, and Thomas Davis, the national 
 poet, and Parnell in our own day, were all Protestants. Regardless 
 of religion, regardless of creed, they were types and forerunners of 
 the splendid body of idealists, the men who, assembled in Dublin 
 to-day, speaking tor Ireland, even though their writs run to no foot 
 of land, are animated by the same centuries old holy hope for liberty. 
 
8G0 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERM AH Y. 
 
 All three of 11 s who went to Paris—Dunne, Ryan, and Walsh— 
 were horn in this country. All our interests are here. The dust of 
 our fathers and the bones of our children are alike buried in America. 
 We love America above all other nations. Three of my household 
 went into this war. One of my kin is dead at Chateau-Thierry. I 
 looked for his grave over there. The French Government conducted 
 me and Gov. Dunne to find that grave. Our kin entered this war 
 believing that the United States meant what it said, that the right 
 of self-determination should be given to all peoples, and the Irish, 
 no matter what their feelings were that no war should have been 
 declared, when this Congress spoke they rallied to a man; they 
 poured forth their blood and their treasure, whether from Massa¬ 
 chusetts or Missouri or Pennsylvania or California. Wherever it 
 might be, the Irish rallied to the cause of the Stars and Stripes; and 
 I beg of you Senators to exercise your rights and keep the pledged 
 faith of America. Keep troth to the living and to the dead, and 
 save this Nation and save our sons from engaging in wars to which 
 neither the conscience nor the Congress of the United States shall 
 give its assent, by defeating this treaty. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. I have the pleasure of introducing Gov. Dunne, 
 the third member of the commission that went to Paris, former gov¬ 
 ernor of Illinois, former mayor of the city of Chicago. 
 
 STATEMENT OE HON. EDWARD F. DUNNE. 
 
 Mr. Dunne. Senator Lodge and fellow Senators, I with my col¬ 
 leagues appreciate the great courtesy extended to ourselves and to 
 those who will address you after I have concluded my brief state¬ 
 ment, and I will not unduly trespass upon your most valuable time. 
 
 Permit me briefly to corroborate in general the statements made 
 so eloquently, so forcefully, and so truthfully by Mr. Walsh and by 
 Mr. Ryan. Let me tell you gentlemen why we went to Paris. We 
 had read, as every American citizen has read, the aims and objects 
 of the American Nation as expressed by its Chief Executive in enter¬ 
 ing this 'World War. We believe that the aims and objects so lucidly, 
 so clearly, so forcefully stated by the President of the United States 
 would, when that war was consummated, be carried out at the confer¬ 
 ence in Paris. 
 
 We, with millions of our fellow citizens in this country, expected 
 that the Irish nation would not be made an exception among the 
 weaker nations of the earth. We waited with patience and with con¬ 
 fidence that at the conference in Paris the representatives selected 
 by the American people would embody in the terms of the peace that 
 was to be consummated there the aims and objects of the American 
 people as expressed by its President. We waited until the 1st of 
 February. We knew that in Paris the envoys of the Irish nation 
 were knocking at the doors of the conference and asking a safe con¬ 
 duct for the duly elected representatives of the Irish people to Paris, 
 so that they could present to this conference the claims of the Irish 
 people to nationhood. So far as the papers of America were con¬ 
 cerned, and so far as the papers of the world were concerned, the 
 name of Ireland was not mentioned at that conference. We are citi¬ 
 zens of America, who were born here, who love and admire this coun¬ 
 try and believe in keeping its faith; we happen to have Irish blood 
 
TREATY OF FEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 861 
 
 in our veins, but all three of us, like Mr. Walsh, were born here, and 
 we all feel alike about this country. Like Mr. Walsh, I was not 
 identified in any way with Irish societies. For years and years be¬ 
 fore I was honored by that great convention with the appointment as 
 one of its commissioners, I had devoted all my life to American citi¬ 
 zenship solely, and had been honored by my fellow citizens as an 
 American citizen. I love this country above all countries, as they do, 
 and we would sink Ireland and every other country into the deep 
 rather than sacrifice the interests of this country. 
 
 We met at that convention. I think it was the most extraordinary 
 convention I ever attended. Over 5,000 people who felt as we did 
 gathered from every State and Territory in the United States, and 
 under the guidance and inspiration of that convention a committee of 
 25 were appointed for the purpose of assisting the Irish people be¬ 
 fore the American commission in Paris to obtain a hearing, and the 
 right of Ireland, as determined by an election held in December, 
 three months after the armistice was signed, under ail the forms and 
 securities of British law, in which it was determined by three- 
 quarters of the Irish people, in round numbers, that an Irish republic 
 was bom, and a declaration of independence was issued such as the 
 American people issued in 1776. 
 
 That committee of 25 honored Mr. Walsh, Mr. Ryan, and myself, 
 asking us to become a commission of three to go to Paris, to appeal 
 for what and to whom? To appeal to the representatives of the 
 American Nation in Paris for the right of the Irish people to be 
 heard in Paris along the lines enunciated by the President when he 
 advised the American people to enter this world-wide war. Before 
 we left Washington Mr. Walsh, in a letter to the Secretary of State, 
 told the Secretary of State the object of our mission. It was avow¬ 
 edly political. It was avowedly for the purpose of enabling us to 
 obtain a hearing for the Irish nation before the world peace confer¬ 
 ence. That letter is on file with the Secretary of State. After some 
 delay passports were issued. I believe there was a protest from the 
 British Government which delayed us 48 hours, but the Secretary of 
 State granted the passports upon that letter. 
 
 The Secretary of State and the whole world knew, through the 
 newspapers, the object of our mission, which was avowedly political. 
 
 We arrived at Paris. We were careful from the start to place the 
 objects of our mission in writing and address it to the President first. 
 The letter was addressed to the President and we were accorded a 
 long interview, and I think I can characterize it as an unofficially 
 sympathetic interview. The President referred us to Col. House. 
 We had several interviews with Col. House, who treated us with 
 extreme courtesy and acted with extreme diligence, but also unoffi¬ 
 cially. 
 
 I think Mr. Walsh interviewed every member of the American 
 delegation. I personally interviewed every member but one, Secre¬ 
 tary Lansing. We pointed out that we came as American citizens 
 to address five American citizens in their official capacity as the 
 representatives of the great American Republic, and all that w^o 
 asked of the official representatives of the American Republic was 
 to use their good offices officially to obtain for the duly elected repre¬ 
 sentatives of the Irish people, elected under all the securities of 
 British law, the right to plead their case before the tribunal in Paris, 
 
862 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 That was the sole object of our mission. Col. House acted with 
 extreme diligence and courtesy, as my colleagues have told you. I 
 think he interviewed Lloyd-George on the subject, and gave us to 
 understand that he believed we were going to get for them that safe 
 conduct. 
 
 The Chairman. Unofficially? 
 
 Mr. Dunne. Unofficially, but told us that Lloyd-George — I sup¬ 
 pose also unofficially—desired to meet the members of the delegation, 
 and we believed that our cause was so impregnably just from the 
 standpoint of American citizens that we could afford to meet and 
 argue with Lloyd-George the justice of the Irish demand, and we 
 consented to meet him at any day he might designate, and a day 
 was designated to meet him. On the day designated it turned out, 
 and I think truthfully, that owing to the exigencies of the situation 
 in the preparation of the final draft of the peace conference and its 
 presentation to the German representatives, Lloyd-George was un¬ 
 able to keep the appointment for the interview with us, and we were 
 courteously so informed in the presence of Col. House, by Sir Wil¬ 
 liam Wiseman. It was then suggested, I do not know by whom, 
 that as the safe conduct was not to be given promptly, and as the 
 delegates of the Irish people were in Ireland and we were in Paris, it 
 was impossible for us to confer with them, if they could not come 
 to Paris, unless we could go to Ireland. 
 
 Thereupon, by prompt cooperation between the American officials, 
 French officials, and British officials, we were given passports the 
 next day wdiich stated upon their face that our mission was diplomatic, 
 and that we were going upon an unofficial political mission, and we 
 avowedly stated that our desire was to communicate with the repre¬ 
 sentatives of the Irish people and to become acquainted at first-hand 
 with the situation in Ireland. There was no disguise about the object 
 of our visit, and no restrictions or limitations of any character were 
 imposed upon us either by the British premier or by the French au¬ 
 thorities or by the American authorities, and we went to Ireland. 
 And this is what we found there in Ireland, a component part of the 
 British Empire, that the people of Ireland were without any of the 
 British constitutional securities which are thrown around the citizens 
 of those Islands. We found that the habeas corpus was practically 
 suspended, because o^ the restrictions thrown around it by the rulings 
 of British courts, which made it an idle formality. We found the 
 right of trial by jury suspended. Any man charged with political 
 crime in Ireland could be tired only before a British court-martial, 
 military authorities, or before a removable magistrate without a jury, 
 these removable magistrates being appointed by the crown, many of 
 them from the police force, sent from Dublin and different districts 
 in Ireland, removable overnight, earning salaries of $4,000 a year 
 and amenable to the recall of the Government at any time. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Is there any appeal from the decisions of those 
 military magistrates? 
 
 Mr. Dunne. None that I know of. Men were arrested without 
 warrant. We found that houses were searched without warrant, 
 and men when arrested were imprisoned in British jails or deported 
 to English jails, and not informed what charges were made against 
 them. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 863 
 
 Senator Brandegee. The previous speaker, Mr. Walsh, spoke of 
 men being taken prisoners in this fight between the populace ancl the 
 British constabulary. What sort of a trial did they get ? 
 
 Mr. Dunne. My information is that they got a trial before a court- 
 martial or a removable magistrate. If a man in Ireland makes a 
 speech in which he advocates the republic he is immediately brought 
 up. If he advocates or argues in favor of the recognition of the 
 Irish republic, they take that man up before a court-martial or before 
 a removable magistrate, who is paid $4,000 a year. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Under the British law it is a crime to advocate 
 that, is it not? 
 
 Mr. Dunne. Yes; notwithstanding the fact that 75 per cent of the 
 people have gone to the polls openly and voted for that. We found 
 that men’s houses are searched without warrant; that men, women, 
 and children are arrested without warrant and confined at the pleas¬ 
 ure of the Government, either in an Irish jail or deported to an Eng¬ 
 lish jail. A boy, 11 years of age, was arrested there and kept in jail 
 for two months. No one knew where he was. Finally he was re¬ 
 leased when there was a threat of an investigation. That is the sit¬ 
 uation we found in Ireland. 
 
 The leaders of the Irish people, the men who were elected by their 
 constituents to the British Parliament, refused to attend the British 
 Parliament and organized the Irish Parliament—the Dail Eireann; 
 many of them were in jail, not being able to attend the meetings or 
 the Parliament, with the result, of course, that the sentiment of the 
 people being so overwhelmingly with them that when they get them 
 in jail they can not keep them there. Robert Barton, owner of a 
 landed estate, 1,200 acres of the most beautiful country ever seen, 
 with a manorial residence, an officer of the British Government, was 
 compelled by the British authorities to take charge of Irish prison¬ 
 ers and saw such indecencies committed that he resigned his office 
 as a protest, becoming a Republican, and was elected to the Dail 
 Eireann. He made a speech during the campaign. He was ar¬ 
 rested and placed in Mountjo}^, remained there a couple of weeks, 
 and then managed to saw a bar, left a very polite and humorous 
 note addressed to the governor of the jail, saying that he did not like 
 his bill of fare or his sleeping accommodations, and would the gov¬ 
 ernor of the jail be kind enough to send his clothes to the address 
 given in Dublin. He was a man of such prominence and his case 
 excited so much interest that an official investigation was ordered, 
 and while the investigation was going on in the jail the deputy war¬ 
 den rushed in and said, “ My God, there are 23 more of those fellows 
 gone over the wall.” That is the situation in Ireland. 
 
 Let me tell you of two little incidents that I witnessed with my 
 own eyes. Three of four hundred soldiers under the command of 
 British officers surrounded the Mansion House in Dublin, and three 
 or four hundred policemen under official direction surrounded the 
 Mansion House at half past 5 in the afternoon, for the sole purpose 
 of preventing the Lord Mayor of Dublin from extending an official 
 reception to the delegates from America. While we were attempt¬ 
 ing to get in, some guns were fired. There were a crowd of 20,000 
 or 30,000 people around the house, brought there by the mere fact 
 that the military, with armored guns, were around the Mansion 
 House. People were laughing at them and guying that ridiculous 
 
864 
 
 TREATY OF F ACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 display of military force made for the sole purpose of preventing 
 a social function tendered by the chief executive of the great city of 
 Dublin to the three gentlemen who had come there from America. 
 
 A few hours before that the bedroom of the chief lady of Ireland 
 was desecrated by the police, seeking as they claimed^ some es¬ 
 caped prisoners. That is the situation which we found in Ireland. 
 
 Now, it is my judgment that if this treaty be confirmed by this 
 body—and you are charged with the responsibility of approving 
 or disregarding this treaty—if section 11 be approved you gentle¬ 
 men will be acting as partners in the enforcement of that kind of 
 law upon an unwilling people. We ask you to reject this treaty 
 as American citizens, not because we are Irishmen, but because the 
 Government over there as it now exists is an outrage upon consti¬ 
 tutional government, because there is a situation to-day that rivals, 
 if it does not exceed, the situation that prevailed years ago under 
 the most tyrannical conditions of that time. 
 
 The Chairman. The committee will take a recess now until 2 
 o’clock. We will hear the Greeks from 2 to 3, and then we will 
 resume this hearing. 
 
 (Whereupon, at 1 p. m. a recess was taken until 2 p. m.) 
 
 AFTER RECESS. 
 
 The committee reconvened pursuant to the taking of the recess, 
 at 2 o’clock p. m., Senator Henry Cabot Lodge presiding. 
 
 The Chairman. I have here a protest against the views expressed 
 in the morning session, signed by David W. Irvine, Henry Stewart, 
 John Kennedy, Lieut. Lewis H. Shaw, Albert E. Kelley, William 
 II. Cheney, and William Balfour. I told these gentlemen that we 
 could not give them a hearing to-day, but I would give them a hear¬ 
 ing next week. The gentleman who represented them said he de¬ 
 sired to file this brief and have it published in our hearings. 
 
 Senator Knox. It is a brief against what ? 
 
 The Chairman. It is in opposition to what has been said here this 
 morning. It will be printed at the conclusion of this hearing. 
 
 Senator Knox. Mr. Chairman, I see no objection to including 
 within our hearings everything that we hear, but does the chairman 
 think that we ought to open the door for people to file briefs? 
 
 The Chairman. That authority was given when we started the 
 hearings—that they would have a right to file briefs. 
 
 Senator Knox. The first thing we know they will be filing books 
 after a while. I think anyone who has anything to say ought to 
 heard. 
 
 The Chairman. This relates to the hearing which we granted 
 this morning. The other side has requested to be heard in this 
 way. 
 
 Senator Knox. I think we ought to hear them, if they are here. 
 
 The Chairman. We could not hear them to-day, and I thought 
 it would save the time of the committee to permit them to put in a 
 brief. We have done that on several occasions. 
 
 Senator New. The brief is in lieu of a hearing? 
 
 The Chairman. In lieu of a hearing; yes. 
 
 Senator Knox. I do not want to insist, but it does seem to me 
 that if they have anything to say that is worth hearing, we would 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 865 
 
 better hear them rather than give them an indefinite right to print, 
 because that is what it amounts to. 
 
 The Chairman. I think we can control the right to print. 
 
 Senator Knox. Perhaps we can. 
 
 (The brief referred to will be found at the conclusion of to-day's 
 proceedings.) 
 
 The Chairman. Judge Colialan. I will ask you to present your 
 next speaker. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Gentlemen, I have the pleasure now of present¬ 
 ing to you Lieut. Gov. W. W. McDowell, of Montana. 
 
 STATEMENT OF IION. W. W. McBOWELL, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR 
 
 OF MONTANA. 
 
 Mr. McDowell. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, when I came to 
 Washington from Montana on yesterday morning with the seven 
 governors who were appointed to attend the governors’ conference 
 with, the President and the Attorney General, I did not know I was 
 to have the pleasure and the honor of appearing before this com¬ 
 mittee. 
 
 I have been told by the gentlemen having this movement in charge 
 that I am expected to speak only a few minutes, and that they would 
 like to have me refer to the reception given to President cle Valera, 
 president of the Irish Pepublic, when he came to Montana recently. 
 As my time is very limited, I will devote it to that angle of the 
 matter, as tending to show the sentiment of the people on the ques¬ 
 tion now being considered by this committee. 
 
 I will state that as lieutenant governor of Montana my duty is to 
 preside over the State senate, and as such presiding officer I am 
 familiar with the action taken by the legislature in its last regular 
 session held in January and February of this year, and also the 
 action taken at the special session held a few weeks ago. 
 
 At the regular session of the legislature last winter a resolution 
 was unanimously adopted, there being no dissenting vote in either 
 the senate or the house, asking the Senate and House of Represen¬ 
 tatives of the Congress of the United States to use their best en¬ 
 deavors to bring about the recognition of the independence of Ire¬ 
 land. 
 
 Before the special session of the Legislature of Montana met, 
 President de Valera, of the Irish republic, came to Montana. 1 live 
 in Butte, and as I was then acting governor it became my pleasure 
 to welcome President de Valera to Montana and to extend to him the 
 freedom of the State. The reception which he received there was 
 the most enthusiastic and the most spontaneous reception that I have 
 ever seen since I have lived in Montana during the past 24 years. 
 Our little town has a population of only about 65,000 people, but there 
 were at least 10.000 people at the depot to greet President de Valera 
 when he got off the train. It was almost impossible for him to get 
 through the crowd to get into the automobile which was waiting for 
 him to go uptown. I had the pleasure and the honor of riding up¬ 
 town with the president, and I noticed that there were more re¬ 
 turned soldiers in uniform escorting that automobile uptown than I 
 have ever seen in uniform in Butte before or since the war started. 
 
8G6 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 I saw a great many horny-handed sons of toil break through the line 
 and rush up to the automobile to shake hands with the president of 
 the Irish republic, and there were tears in their eyes. The procession 
 that came up from the depot with him was at least a mile and a half 
 long. Every musical organization that we could get together in the 
 State was there, and the sentiment of the people of Butte and the 
 people of Montana is undoubtedly very strong in favor of Irish inde¬ 
 pendence. 
 
 At the special session of the legislature the matter of again pass¬ 
 ing a resolution came up a few weeks ago. This was after President 
 de Valera had been invited by me as the president of the senate to 
 make an address to a joint session of the legislature. He stayed over 
 several days so as to make this address. Some little opposition de¬ 
 veloped among some people in the legislature against inviting him. 
 However, he was unanimously invited to address the legislature, 
 'which he did. Pie wras then introduced to the crowd that could not 
 get into the legislative hall, waiting in front of the capitol, and he 
 received the same kind of an ovation in Helena at two or three meet¬ 
 ings that he had received in Butte. 
 
 Another resolution Tvas introduced in the special session of the 
 legislature asking the Senate of the United States and Congress to 
 do what they could to bring about recognition of the Irish republic, 
 and this matter was fought out on its merits, and finally passed both 
 the house and the senate by a good majority. I mention this to show 
 that, in my opinion, three-fourths of the people of Montana and 
 of the States around Montana are thoroughly and heartily in sym¬ 
 pathy with the movement for the freedom of Ireland. 
 
 Senator Knox. May I ask you a question right here ? It was rep¬ 
 resented to us this morning that the fate of the Irish republic de¬ 
 pends upon whether or not we reject this proposed league of nations. 
 Now ; you say the sentiment in Montana is in favor of an Irish re¬ 
 public. How is the sentiment there on the question of the league of 
 nations? 
 
 Mr. McDo'well. I believe the opinion in Montana and in the sur¬ 
 rounding States is one of decided opposition to any clause in any 
 treaty or in any league of nations that will in any w r ay stand in the 
 way of Ireland securing her freedom. 
 
 Senator Knox. Then if Mr. Walsh is correct in his statement this 
 morning that to adopt this league at all would defeat the Irish repub¬ 
 lic, your judgment is that the sentiment of the people of Montana 
 would be against the whole league? 
 
 Mr. McDow t ell. I think I have expressed the opinion which I wish 
 to express in what I said before. 
 
 Senator Knox. All right, I will not press you further. 
 
 Senator Fall. Would you object to answering this question: Is it 
 the opinion there that any article in this proposed league would pos¬ 
 sibly affect the freedom of Ireland? 
 
 Mr. McDov 7 ell. I think that among practically all of the Irish 
 in Montana they feel that it would. There are a great many other 
 people in Montana and in the adjoining States who are not of Irish 
 blood, who, I think, are in hearty sympathy with the aspirations of 
 Ireland, and would be opposed to any clause in any treaty that would 
 stand in the way of Irish freedom. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 867 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. One further question: Do you 
 think guaranteeing the boundaries of the British Empire will affect 
 the question concerning which you are speaking here and the ques¬ 
 tion that we have before us to-day? 
 
 Mr. McDowell. Senator, I have answered that question as far as 
 I am prepared to answer it. 
 
 Senator Johnson of California. I wanted to be perfectly fair on 
 the proposition and perfectly fair as to the position that you gentle¬ 
 men take in respect to this matter. 
 
 Mr. McDowell. I am approaching this matter from a somewhat 
 different angle from that of a great many of the gentlemen who 
 have spoken here this morning so eloquently on this matter. I am a 
 Protestant. My ancestors came to this country 250 years ago, and 
 I am thoroughly and heartily in favor of Irish freedom and in help¬ 
 ing them to obtain it. I think the great majority of the people of 
 Montana and the surrounding States feel the same way about it re¬ 
 gardless of whether they have any Irish blood or not, and they would 
 be opposed to any clause in any treaty that would stand in the way 
 of Ireland securing that independence. 
 
 Judge Coiialan. I wish next to present Mr. John A. Murphy, of 
 Buffalo, N. Y., the fourth member of the American Commission on 
 Irish Independence, who has recently come back from Paris. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ME. JOHN ABCHDEACON MURPHY. 
 
 Mr. Murphy. Mr. Chairman and Senators, in accordance with the 
 request of the committee having in charge the American Commission 
 on Irish Independence, I left on the 21st of June and reached Paris 
 on the 30th of June. During the week while I was sailing the peace 
 treaty had been signed and the President and the presidential party 
 had returned to America. The colleagues with whom I expected to 
 fall in in the carrying on of the work, Messrs. Walsh and Dunne, 
 had also returned from Paris, and I did not meet them in France. 
 
 It is needless to say that for a while the situation in France, as a 
 stranger might sense it, was one of relaxation after the strain of 
 the peace conference. It was one of an intense amount of gossip and 
 whispers and reactions from the results of the peace conference. 
 
 During the most of the time I was there I was busily engaged in 
 presenting the case of Ireland to the editors of the French papers 
 and in endeavoring to obtain a presentation of it before Mr. Clemen- 
 ceau, to whom it was stated the question of Ireland was referred in 
 his capacity as president of the peace conference. 
 
 After being in Paris for about two or three weeks I became ad¬ 
 vised that before the President and Mr. Lansing left France they 
 had been informed by Mr. Clemenceau in his capacity as president 
 of the peace conference that no action would be taken upon the 
 question of Ireland. That was material news and in my judgment 
 it foreclosed any possibility that Ireland may have or might expect 
 to have of prosecuting her cause before the league of nations. 
 
 On June 22 I wrote a letter in the name of the American Commis¬ 
 sion on Irish Independence to Mr. Clemenceau, and if you will per¬ 
 mit me I will read the letter, or if you desire I will insert it in the 
 record. It is on page 65 of the brown pamphlet. 
 
 135549°—19-S 
 
868 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 The Chairman. The letter will be inserted in the record. 
 
 The letter is as follows: 
 
 [Personal and urgent.] 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 Paris, July 22, 1919. 
 
 M. Georges Clemenceau. 
 
 President of the Peace Conference and Premier of France, Paris. 
 
 Monsier le President : We are in receipt of ^information from sources of high 
 authorities that, as president of the peace conference, you have notified Ameri¬ 
 can peace plenipotentiaries that, so far as further consideration of the Irish 
 question is concerned, the matter is one in which you will take no action. 
 
 We understand this decision covers: 
 
 1. That the resolution of the American Senate, officially forwarded to you 
 by the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, and the recommendations 
 contained therein expressing sympathetic support to the people of Ireland in 
 their efforts to obtain a government of their own choice, is, by this action, 
 denied in a manner suggestive of your entire disregard of American public 
 
 2. That the peace conference further ignores the request of the Hon. Messrs. 
 Walsh and Dunne for the appointment of an international tribunal to investi¬ 
 gate into the charges of barbarities and inhuman conduct, in violation of the 
 rules of civilized warfare, perpetrated by the British Government through its 
 military forces in occupation of Ireland, and upon its defenseless people. 
 
 The knowledge of your decision in these matters has been up to now with¬ 
 held from the American public. The results of the publication of this informa¬ 
 tion will doubtless have very material weight at this time while the attention 
 of the United States Senate is occupied in matters of international importance, 
 in which we feel France has a material interest. Arrangements have already 
 been made for giving widespread publicity in America to this decision on your 
 part. But before taking this step, we respectfully suggest that an audience 
 may be granted by you to the undersigned to present the importance of the 
 situation, particularly in its relation to the future interests of France, of 
 America, and of Great Britain. 
 
 There are 20,000,000 citizens of Irish blood in the United States, and the 
 effect of this information when published there needs no characterization by 
 us to indicate how grave may be the danger to the continuance of those same 
 relations of amity and esteem that have marked the friendships existing be¬ 
 tween the French, American, and Irish peoples. 
 
 Trusting that I may be accorded the honor of this audience with you at 
 your earliest possible convenience, and with assurances of high esteem and 
 respect, we have the honor to remain, 
 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 American Commission on Irish Independence, 
 
 John Archdeacon Murphy, Commissioner in Charge . 
 
 Mr. Muepiiy. I was aware that the information I bad received 
 had not been made public in America, and that it was held under the 
 the veil of secrecy from publication by request of the American 
 opinion as rendered in the deliberate resolution of our highest legislative 
 body. 
 
 representatives. After the letter was delivered to Mr. Clemenceau, 
 the information was conveyed back to me in circuitous fashion that 
 if I were to make public the information that I had outlined in that 
 letter to Mr. Clemenceau it would not be wise or judicious, while 
 I was a guest in Paris. Therefore I refrained from making it pub¬ 
 lic until I returned to America; but it was known, not in one circle 
 but in many, that there was an effort made to conceal from the 
 American people and from the American Senate this action on the 
 part of Clemenceau until they bad, as it was hoped, passed favorably 
 upon and ratified the league of nations. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. You speak of this information as having been 
 conveyed to you circuitously. Do you know from whom it origi¬ 
 nated % 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 8G9 
 
 Mr. Murphy. You mean the information that it should not be 
 published ? 
 
 Senator Brandegee. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Murpiiy. No; I can not say that of my own knowledge, except 
 to say that one of the most important men who is accredited to have 
 the ear of the French Government, the foreign editor of Le Temps, 
 advised an associate and friend of mine, Mr. Erskine Chillers, a 
 former major in the British army, a man who has espoused the cause 
 of the Irish Republic in a wholehearted and unadulterated manner, 
 and one of the best known publicists in England. The foreign edi¬ 
 tor of Le Temps conveyed this information to him and I have rea¬ 
 son to believe that that was an inspired message. I did not say that 
 that was a message brought from Mr. Clcmenceau, but either Mr. 
 Clemcnceau or Mr. Tardieu were the only two who had knowledge of 
 it unless they conveyed that knowledge to some one else. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. What I wanted to know was, in your judg¬ 
 ment, did that information represent the French opinion, or did it 
 represent the desire of the American commission? 
 
 Mr. Murpiiy. I construed it as representing the French request, 
 in accordance with the action of the American commission. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. That is all I care to ask. 
 
 Mr. Murphy. There is one more incident that I would like to pre¬ 
 sent to you, and then I will give way to others. I .am not going to 
 occupy your time with the delivery of any argument on this ques¬ 
 tion. There is a short presentation of one phase of the question that, 
 with your permission, I will ask to insert in the record later. 
 
 At or about this time, by reason of family connections and business 
 interests, I desired to visit England and Ireland. I made my re¬ 
 quest before Consul Reed in the ordinary manner, for an amendment 
 to my passport. My passport did not give me permission to proceed 
 anywhere except to France, as it stated, to attend the peace confer¬ 
 ence in the interest of self-government for Ireland. I was told my 
 request would have to be sent to Washington. After waiting two 
 weeks on the pleasure of Washington, as they explained to me,l had 
 ealled three or four times to ascertain if there was any reply to my 
 request to amend my passport, and on August 8 I received the fol¬ 
 lowing letter: 
 
 John A. Murphy, Esq., 
 
 Grand Hotel , Paris. 
 
 United States Passport Bureau, 
 
 Paris , August S, 1910. 
 
 Sir : Referring to your recent call at the passport bureau, you are Informed 
 that a telegram has been received from Washington Instructing the bureau to 
 refuse to amend your passport for Ireland. 
 
 There is inclosed herewith the amount of 0.80 franc in stamps, which repre¬ 
 sents the balance due you after the cable charges have been deducted from 
 the sum of 100 francs which you deposited. 
 
 I am, sir, 
 
 Respectfully youre, 
 
 E. O. Reed, 
 
 American Consul. 
 
 I felt surprised, Mr. Chairman and Senators, that in pursuit of my 
 private business as an American citizen my Government should deny 
 me the right to proceed to the British Isles. My request for a pass¬ 
 port was not to go to Ireland. My request for a passport was to 
 
870 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 proceed to the British Isles. I had personally said that my purpose 
 was not political; that I desired no exemptions from the laws of the 
 land. I had desired to proceed there for family and personal rea¬ 
 sons. Now, Mr. Chairman and Senators, on the other matter which 
 I wish to present to the committee I wish to say that during a stay 
 of about two months in Paris, where I met many of the editors of 
 the French press and many of the public men of France, I have had 
 opportunity to get a vision of the proposed league of nations some¬ 
 what different from that which would naturally otherwise have been 
 given to me. 
 
 From my training and environment I have naturally paid most 
 attention to the economic and industrial aspect of the treaty. The 
 trouble with the treaty is that it is neither a treaty of vengeance nor 
 a treaty of justice ; it is calculated to maintain forever a commercial 
 supremacy to one or two of the high contracting parties. I regret 
 to say that America does not seem to be included as one of those 
 parties. 
 
 The condition of France at the present time, as admitted to mo in 
 private conference by their thinking minds, is one of gravest import. 
 Its finances are in a depleted condition; it lias exercised its power of 
 taxation so far as it is believed the people of France will endure, 
 and still the income is more than a billion dollars below the abso¬ 
 lute requirements of its budget, even with its army demobilized. 
 
 I spent some days driving over the devastated regions of northern 
 France, and the paralysis of the country is appalling. The difficul¬ 
 ties. of obtaining raw materials and coal are greater than I can 
 describe. 
 
 There has been no outlet for commercial development accorded 
 to it by this present proposed treaty. Even the commercial ad¬ 
 vantages which have accrued to France from its old protectorate 
 of the Christian people of the Orient is being imperiled by the 
 British control in Mesopotamia and the Near East. Fiftj^-five per 
 cent of the German indemnity which is supposed to be obtained by 
 France is incomplete and uncertain reparation. Many eventualities 
 may occur which would defer or avoid the payment of these in¬ 
 demnities, and neither France nor the world at large could ever be 
 called to arms for the purpose of enforcing at the point of the sword 
 payment which may or may not be beyond the will or the possibilities 
 of the central powers to pay. 
 
 On the other hand, the question of sovereignty over subject people 
 is understood in a more material way abroad than we generally 
 understand it in America. It is understood as the right of commer¬ 
 cial exploitation, and whether it be in the guise of mandatories for 
 itself or its colonies, the British Empire has most successfully ob¬ 
 tained the control of countries and people which are more than a 
 commercial compensation for the losses endured even by the British 
 Empire in the prosecution of war. I refer to the control that Eng¬ 
 land now possesses under the terms proposed by this treaty, of almost 
 one-third of the earth’s surface. I am not discussing the freedom 
 of the seas for the minute. Gibraltar, Malta, Suez, Aiden, and all 
 the other strategic points held by England are solid answers in denial 
 of the assertion that the freedom of the seas now exists. 
 
 This present treaty proposes to subject forever the sovereignty of 
 Egypt, to condemn the oldest nation in the world to serfdom and 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 871 
 
 to commercial exploitation; Asia Minor, Arabia, Persia, Afghani¬ 
 stan, Thibet, Burmah, India, form an unbroken chain in the interest 
 of England to meet and to connect its links with the sphere of in¬ 
 fluence claimed, and by this treaty yielded to the Imperial Govern¬ 
 ment of Japan. 
 
 Japan, whose losses in this war were of a negligible quantity, is 
 to be confirmed in its control of Korea with its 20,000,000 of people, 
 and to be accorded the control of Shantung, with its iron, and coal, 
 and mineral resources, and its many millions of Chinese inhabitants, 
 and which must be regarded as the commercial jugular vein of 
 China; by it, and through its waterways and railways of the interior 
 of China, will be acquired by commercial and treaty advantages. 
 
 It is not necessary to more than glance at the map of Africa to 
 see that from Cairo to the Cape it is to be dominated in the British 
 interest. 
 
 I point out these things to you gentlemen to call your attention to 
 the undying antagonism that exists between the principles upon 
 which a Government like ours is founded, of the people and for the 
 people, and the principles upon which an imperial government is 
 founded, where the Crown is, if not the right divine, at least it is 
 the center around which rallies in support the commercial, the mili¬ 
 tary, and selfish oligarchies of privilege. All of this, which I believe 
 you will admit as self-evident, is to my mind trained and aimed more 
 especially against America than any other country in the world; it 
 is asserted that our factories produce in eight months our domestic 
 requirements, so that for four months of the year we are forced 
 either to seek foreign markets or to shut down our factories. Eng- 
 land well knows that it can not stop the fertility of our fields from 
 producing cotton and corn and the necessaries of life in bounteous 
 plenty; nor our mines in their production of raw material in prac¬ 
 tically unlimited quantities; nor can it fetter the energy and the 
 power of American industrial and commercial development. It 
 therefore seeks, under the specious title of a league of nations, to 
 draw a wall of iron around the markets of the world, where, by a 
 preferential imperial tariff, the products of our factories will be 
 handicapped in their efforts to obtain a foreign market; where from 
 time to time a slight concession here and there on their part may be 
 looked upon and exploited as an act of generosity on their part 
 toward their American cousins, and so through the aid of finance 
 and intrigue an invisible British Empire may be superimposed upon 
 the destinies of America. 
 
 We are asked to abdicate our sovereignty in favor of a sovereignty 
 of a composite body in which we have but one vote as against six 
 votes of the British Empire, and the six votes of the British Empire 
 are but a small portion of its influence. It will be in a position to 
 offer to every country in the world—France, Italy, Greece—special 
 concessions and considerations for their vote on every question that 
 arises wherein American interests might be circumscribed and im¬ 
 peded, regardless of principle or regardless of the eternal right 
 in the controversy involved. 
 
 I have not attempted in these few words to enter into any discus¬ 
 sion of the question from the Irish point of view, because I wanted 
 it plain that my objections against this are American in the most 
 
872 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 intense and vital things. But I respectfully submit for your con¬ 
 sideration that the question of Ireland is interminably involved in 
 this whole scheme of operation. America is at the present time 
 engaged in the development of a mercantile marine to make it inde¬ 
 pendent of either the good will or capacity of any other power in 
 delivering to foreign markets the products of our factories, and 
 especially for our trade with Europe. Her ships must have a point 
 of debarkation as well as embarkation. In other words, a line of 
 mercantile marine without harbors in Europe would be short lived 
 and unprofitable. The harbors of England are and wall be insuffi¬ 
 cient for the British commerce; the harbors of Europe will be domi¬ 
 nated and controlled in the interest of their respective governments. 
 Ireland alone offers to America friendly, sufficient, and secure har¬ 
 bors for the termini of its mercantile marine in the European carry¬ 
 ing trade. From these harbors by packet steamships may be made 
 the quickest, the cheapest, and the best distribution in Europe of 
 American goods and merchandise. 
 
 What the attitude of England would be to bar the development of 
 Irish harbors in this connection was illustrated in 1913, when 
 Europe was at peace. The White Star Line, at the instance of the 
 British Government, discontinued Queenstown as a port of call. The 
 Hamburg-American Line announced that it would make Queenstown 
 a port of call, but before even one ship of that line made a call at 
 Queenstown, the British Government, in pursuance of its policy of 
 commercial isolation with which it has surrounded Ireland informed 
 the Imperial Government of Germany that making Queenstown a 
 port of call would be considered by the British Government un¬ 
 friendly, and it was undesirable. 
 
 I therefore submit for your consideration that the recognition of 
 the Irish Republic, the de jure government of Ireland is not only 
 right and desirable as reasoned by every standard of justice and of 
 American ideals, but that America has an enlightened self interest 
 in the doing of this commendable act. 
 
 The brevity of the space allotted to me compels me to deal in con¬ 
 clusions rather than in a presentation of the premises and the logic 
 of the case. But we are asked by this treaty to subscribe our fortunes 
 and the lives of our children and their children’s children to con¬ 
 tinuation in serfdom of hundreds of millions of human beings whom 
 God has created in freedom and equality; we are asked to lock the 
 door against ourselves as an American nation in our own commercial 
 development and while reservations and amendments may draw 
 many of the fangs from this thing serpentine of iniquity, the Ameri¬ 
 can answer should be to kill it and in its place erect a true league 
 of nations imbued with American ideals of justice and equality of op¬ 
 portunity for all. To lay these foundations securely and broadly and 
 deeply and from here, in America, to bring about a league of nations 
 that shall be of all things just to the world and all its peoples, and 
 shall also kill this threatened encirclement of American commerce 
 that lies hidden but real in the terms of the proposed treaty you are 
 now asked to sanction. 
 
 Peace can only come and endure as a result of justice, and until 
 the fabric of this treaty is reconstructed and until the thought that 
 controls its reconstruction becomes American in its democracy, w© 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 873 
 
 must cease to be a people following our traditions, if we support it, 
 and will be dragged down to the lowest levels of commercial greed. 
 
 For these reasons I submit that the defeat of the entire treaty is 
 the most American thing, is the most humanitarian thing, is the 
 most just thing that can now be done. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. The last speaker before Mr. Bourke Cockran will 
 be Mr. Daniel C. O’Flaherty, of Richmond, Va. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ICE. DANIEL C. 0’FLAHERTY. 
 
 Mr. O’ Flaiierty. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: 
 In my opinion the matter which vre are considering demonstrates the 
 wisdom of the fathers when they created the Constitution of the 
 United States. I do not believe in the history of our country a more 
 momentous epoch has ever arisen than is now before you. It is the 
 question of the ratification, by and with the advice and consent of 
 the Senate, of a treaty that I think is more momentous in its con¬ 
 sequences to the people of the world, and especially to the people 
 of the United States, than anything that has ever come before the 
 United States Senate. I speak to you, gentlemen, briefly, not as a 
 politician, but as a Democrat, as a Virginian, as a Southerner, and 
 if I may say so, as a Protestant and a Mason. Some people have said 
 to me, and I have been told, even out in the hall here to-day, that 
 this is a religious question. I say to you that it is not a religious 
 question, it is not a political question, but it is a question which every 
 American citizen has a right to take into consideration. I repeat that 
 since the day when the Liberty Bell rang in old Philadelphia, pro¬ 
 claiming the Declaration of Independence, no more important matter 
 has ever been considered by the people of this country. I have not 
 time to go into it in the way of an argument, and after what has 
 been said here to-day it is not necessary to argue it to such dis¬ 
 tinguished men, constitutional lawyers, but I believe that the ratifica¬ 
 tion of this treaty, wfith articles 10 and 11 and with the other articles 
 that follow along after it, would not make the world safe for de¬ 
 mocracy, but it would make it safe for hypocrisy. [Applause.] 
 
 What is a treaty? It is a contract between nations, and everything 
 that is put in it is put in for somebody’s benefit. What is article 10 
 put in there for? Is it for the benefit of the United States? We do 
 not need it. For whose benefits is it to retain the integrity, for 
 instance, of the British Empire? Somebody says, “Well, how does 
 it do it?” Let us take an illustration: Suppose Canada or Ireland 
 should desire to be free. Suppose Egypt should become free by the 
 volition of England, and England should try to help Canada or Ire¬ 
 land. With whom would we go? We should have to fight against 
 Canada in favor of England. Is not that true? I say as a lawyer 
 that in my humble opinion articles 10 and 11 of this treaty bind 
 Ireland and every other nation that is under the hoof of England, 
 hand and foot to the cross. 
 
 Why should we not speak out? I say to you, gentlemen, in my 
 opinion that if we do not speak out at this awful moment, the very 
 stones in the street should cry out for us. 
 
 I do not claim to speak for all the people of Virginia.. I am glad 
 to say that you have on this committee one of our most distinguished 
 sons, who has his own opinion on this subject and I may differ with 
 
874 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 him; but we have the right to come and be heard, and I come to you 
 to-day as a Virginian, as a Southerner, as an Irishman, as an Irish- 
 American, as a descendant of Irish ancestors back for a thousand 
 years. But I am first an American, and I believe that some of these 
 articles are the greatest blow that has ever been aimed at the Ameri¬ 
 can Constitution. [Applause.] 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I come to you to bear to you a message from a mass 
 meeting held in Richmond the other day, the capital of Virginia, 
 the capital of the old Confederacy, if you please, the home State of 
 our distinguished President. It passed this resolution unanimously. 
 
 Senator Beandegee. Was it a large mass meeting? 
 
 Mr. O’Flaheety. Four thousand people, a large mass meeting for 
 a city of our size, and not a dissenting voice. It unanimously adopted 
 these resolutions: 
 
 Resolved , That we declare ourselves unreservedly in favor of the independ¬ 
 ence of Ireland, and demand that our Government recognize the Irish Republic; 
 and 
 
 Resolved, That we register our opposition to any proposed league of nations 
 which does not protect all American rights and ideals and which binds us to 
 guarantee the territorial integrity of the British and Japanese Empires. 
 
 This resolution was adopted at a meeting at which the mayor of 
 the city presided, and to which his excellency the governor gave the 
 honor of his presence. I believe that if a plebiscite of the people of 
 Virginia were taken without a word of discussion to-day you would 
 find that the majority of them would be in favor of the freedom of 
 Ireland. [Applause.] And I am sure that if you were to go before 
 them and tell them what is being done and tell the truth of the 
 matter they would be still more greatly in favor of it. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have been in a quandary. It is not my desire to 
 embarrass the administration. I believe in that great Virginian who 
 •is the President of the United States, Mr. Wilson, but I believe that 
 any league of nations which perpetuates the British Empire in its 
 present condition, in which portions of that empire are in perpetual 
 thraldom, is un-American, unfair, and will never be ratified by the 
 will and the wishes of the American people. I believe I would be 
 unfair to myself as an American, untrue to the teachings of the 
 great Virginia patriots who did so much to establish this Republic, 
 if I did not raise my voice at least against articles 10 and 11, espe¬ 
 cially, of the proposed league of nations, which, in my view, rivet 
 the bands that bind Ireland to England, and would compel us to 
 assist England in keeping Ireland in perpetual thraldom. I trust 
 in the wisdom of this committee. I say reverently that I thank God 
 that unto men like these were committed by the fathers the keeping 
 of the ark of the covenant of this constitution, that we may be 
 saved—I hope I am not speaking like a school boy—that we may be 
 saved from the rocks ahead of us; that we remember what George 
 Washington said when he warned us to keep out of entangling al¬ 
 liances. Why, this is a cobweb of such a character that the mind of 
 no human being can fathom where we will go under it. So I hope 
 that this committee will safeguard the rights of Ireland, that ancient 
 nation, so that she may take her place among the nations of the earth. 
 She is a nation; she has been a nation; she has every element of a 
 nation, the geography, the ethnology, the soil, the climate, every¬ 
 thing that goes to make up a nation. Why under heaven should Ire- 
 
TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 875 
 
 land, the oldest of all the white nations on earth, be the only one that 
 is denied her freedom? [Applause.] 
 
 A favorite objection of those who are opposed to the independence 
 of Ireland is what they glibly call the “ Ulster question.” Along 
 with this is also the other oft-repeated statement that Irishmen can’t 
 agree among themselves. The last and only election ever held in 
 Ireland in which the question of self-determination was in issue was 
 in December, 1918, in which outside of Ulster, which is only about 
 one-fifth of Ireland, not a single constituency, except a gerry¬ 
 mandered one in Dublin, was carried by the Unionists. So you 
 have the greatest unanimity in four-fifths of Ireland for a republic. 
 
 It is true that in Ulster the Irish do not agree on this political 
 question, or rather those who claim not to be Irish, do not agree. 
 Without discussing the fact that we never agreed upon any.political 
 issue in our own country, and that at the time of the formation of 
 our own republic, there were many Tories, none Irish, however, and 
 we very often fail to agree and it is preferable that we should not 
 alwuays agree. 
 
 It is quite interesting to analyze the Ulster situation from an im¬ 
 partial standpoint, taking the vote of December, 1918, as a basis. 
 I say an impartial standpoint because the writer of this article 
 belongs religiously to the faction that claims to be in the majority 
 in Ulster, and who are opposed to the independence of Ireland, but 
 one w T ho does not share that view. I, as a Protestant, a Mason, and 
 one with other than Irish blood in my veins, can not be accused 
 of being partial to the Catholic Irish, and certainly can see the facts 
 and analyze them freely from the point of the Ulster people, if it 
 is a religious question. 
 
 The chief exponent, as is well known, of this Ulster bugaboo 
 is Mr. Carson, who himself until recently has never represented a 
 constituency in Ireland, but wdio attempts to speak for the Province 
 of Ulster, and his ideas have been widely disseminated through the 
 English press as those which should be accepted b} r the outside world. 
 
 Ulster consists of nine counties—Donegal, Londonderry, Antrim, 
 Tyrone, Down, Fermanagh, Monaghan, Caven, and Armagh. These 
 nine counties in the election which was held for Parliament in 
 1918 were entitled to 25 seats. Out of these the Sinn Feiners car¬ 
 ried 10, the Irish party which was not with the Sinn Feiners but 
 opposed to the Unionists, carried 4, so that the Carsonites or Union¬ 
 ists, only carried 11, or a minority in Ulster. Four of these 11 
 seats were accredited to Antrim, in which the city of Belfast is situ¬ 
 ated, and all these representatives are Unionists. So that outside 
 of the county in which Belfast is situated there were only eight 
 Unionists representatives elected in the whole of Ireland, the seven 
 outside of Antrim, and the one in the gerrymandered district near 
 Dublin, as against 73 Sinn Feiners and 6 of the Irish Party and 6 
 Nationalists. Since that election, just about a month ago, one of 
 the constituents in Antrim w T as captured by the Sinn Feiners in a 
 bye election showing the tremendous change in the sentiment in the 
 only stronghold that the Unionists had, and this is the election at 
 which Mr. Carson said that if he didn’t carry he would resign, 
 which of course was nothing but a bluff, for he is simply the agent 
 of the English Government, and is not likely to resign his job so 
 
876 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 long as lie can hold it. The majority for the Unionists in those con¬ 
 stituencies last December averaged about 6,000. 
 
 These are the cold facts in the case, which are verified by the offi¬ 
 cial reports which I have before me as to the election of 1918. IVe 
 then have a minority of a small section of the country, less than one- 
 fiftli of it, asking that the will of the people of a great country in 
 which a million votes were cast be heard as against the rights of the 
 many. 
 
 Belfast in the last election cast about 79,000 votes for the Union 
 and 39,000 for the Independence. By some sanctity unknown to 
 Americans this 40,000 majority who claim they are not Irish but 
 Sotch-Irish, claim that they ought to rule over a million Irish 
 who are not only shamed to be called Irish, but glory in the dis- 
 tinction.^ When, therefore, you hear anyone repeat the statement 
 that Ireland can not agree as to what she wants, simply recall these 
 facts and ask yourself if such “ twaddle ” should receive any consid¬ 
 eration at the hands of the Americans who believe in majority rule. 
 
 But rest assured that Robert Emmet, a Protestant Irishman’s 
 epitaph will be written some day, and monuments will be erected to 
 others without regard to religion or creed, but simply because they 
 were friends of Irish freedom; and further, that if England’s fleet 
 was thrice as great, and her gold as many times more potent in dis¬ 
 seminating false propaganda, the Irish Republic will live. 
 
 It is thus seen that the only part of Ireland which can’t agree 
 among themselves are the Irishmen of Ulster, and even here many 
 have said that the will of the rest of Ireland should prevail. 
 
 The fact is that many of the people of Antrim, and especially 
 Belfast, are not Irish, but are Scotch, or as they are sometimes errone- 
 ousy called Scotch-Irish, whatever that means, for that term is a 
 much abusd one and ignorantly used, for as a matter of fact there 
 is no such a race as Scotch-Irish as a race. 
 
 The remedy would seem to be, if those people are Scotch or En¬ 
 glish and feel that they do not want to be ruled by the majority of 
 the people of the country, to take a boat and sail across to Glasgow 
 which is just a few hours ride and let the great mass of people who 
 dwell in Ireland conduct the affairs of the country to suit themselves. 
 Belfast is nothing more than a mushroom manufacturing town, 
 which might succeed as well in building ships and making linen in 
 Glasgow as on the other side of the Irish Sea. As well might the 
 cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Newport News, which constitute 
 about the same proportion to the State of Virginia, say that we 
 won’t play with you at all because we don’t like you in other respects 
 and therefore we are not going to submit to the majority of the peo¬ 
 ple of Virginia. In other words, if you should move the shipyards 
 from Belfast, which 40 years ago had a population of less than 
 50,000, to the Clyde or the Firth, you would get rid of the Ulster 
 question and remove the only argument that England has. But 
 luckily this ancient nation has never recognized, and never will as 
 long as the blood of the Gael flows through Irish veins, the govern¬ 
 ment of England maintained at Dublin Castle by force of arms, 
 frnud, and bribery. 
 
 Another argument which is highly esteemed by these self-styled 
 “ Better-than-thou ” Irishmen, is that while we have not the popu¬ 
 lation we have the wealth and intelligence. The facts in the case tss 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 877 
 
 to this canard are even stronger than as to the question of the ma¬ 
 jority in Ulster. 
 
 Leinster, in which the city of Dublin is situated, is a much 
 wealthier province than Ulster. The city of Dublin, with her popu¬ 
 lation, which is really about the same as Belfast, is assessed with 
 property of the value of over £11,000,000, or Dublin is assessed about 
 twice as much as Belfast. Dublin pays an income tax of about £200,- 
 000. The whole of Leinster, taken together, is much wealthier 
 than Ulster, whose wealth is the lowest, except Connaught, which is 
 in the extreme western part of Ireland and much of its territory is a 
 wild and rocky, broken sea country which is not susceptible of culti¬ 
 vation or development. 
 
 But, say these same objectors, Ulster is Protestant and the rest of 
 Ireland is Catholic, and therefore the majority should not rule. That 
 is democracy with a reservation which American people can not 
 understand, for it announces that if the majority in Ulster are Protes¬ 
 tants they should rule, if Catholic they should not. Quoting, how¬ 
 ever, from the religious census in the 9 counties of Ulster, there are 
 690,134 Catholics, 451,566 Presbyterians, 48,490 Methodists, and other 
 scattered religious denominations. The self-constituted guardians 
 of this part of Ireland are always talking of taking care of these 
 Presbyterians. This is wasted sympathy, for in the history of Ire¬ 
 land’s fight for independence since the days of Hugh O’Neill down to 
 the present time the majority of the men who have fought for Ire¬ 
 land’s independence have been of these same Irish Presbyterians or 
 Protestant. Wolf tone, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, O’Connor, and 
 Emmet were all Irish Presbyterians. John Mitchell, John Philpot 
 Curran and many other leaders were Protestants. 
 
 The only leaders that Ireland has had for generations who were 
 Catholics were Daniel O’Connell and Redmond, and it was O’Con¬ 
 nell’s fight that won for both the Catholics and Presbyterians the 
 right of suffrage. The great emancipation bill which freed the Catho¬ 
 lics, freed the Presbyterians, for in the days of O’Connell, no one but 
 the Church of England could vote or hold office, and the so-called 
 Irish Parliament, which voted to destroy Ireland and carried the 
 Union, was a Church of England body with not a single Catholic in 
 it. What then becomes of the foolish statement by men who are 
 otherwise usually intelligent that Ireland’s fight for independence and 
 throwing off of the British yoke has been a religious one? In the 
 past 50 years and prior to the Easter rebellion many Irish Protes¬ 
 tants, for political offenses, have been hanged, drawn and quartered, 
 and dogs have lapped their blood in the streets of Dublin. 
 
 In Ireland’s glorious future these names will not be forgotten, 
 though they are not heroes in the sight of Sir Edward Carson or 
 Bonar Law. they will in future generations be revered as men who 
 would not hug the chains that bound them, nor kiss the feet that 
 trampled upon them, content to be slaves if they could but eat and 
 drink, for such a condition is natural asphyxia in which the breath¬ 
 ing “ of the great dumb, stupid animal alone gives evidence that it 
 lives at all.” 
 
 It was a religious question in a sense at one time, to give help to 
 Protestants and Catholics alike, the right of suffrage, without which 
 
878 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 men are but slaves, and this was carried by Irish Catholics and 
 Irish Presbyterians, and the fight which is being fought out by 
 the Irish, not only in Ireland, but in America and in Canada and 
 in Australia and in New Zealand and in South America by the 
 Friends of Irish Freemen, not as a religious question but as a ques¬ 
 tion of right, and the tide of public opinion of the world is such 
 that no man, no group of men, or no one nation can stop it. 
 
 As I have said on a former occasion, “ Tell me what is the unseen 
 and mystic law that claims the fidelity of the compass and keeps it 
 ever pointing to the polar star? 55 Tell me this and I will tell you 
 why Irishmen, whether they come from the golden vale of Tipperary 
 or the picturesque hills of Connemara, whether smiling in the sun¬ 
 shine of prosperity or groaning under the load of adversity, are 
 drawn to the Prince of Connla, of the Golden Flair, to 
 
 That sunny land 
 From druids and demons free, 
 
 The land of rest, 
 
 In the Golden West, 
 
 On the verge of the azure sea. 
 
 Some ask me the question, “What can Ireland do?” I reply, 
 “ What can England do ? ” She has reached the point where she must 
 respect the wishes of over 4,000,000 people in Ireland or shoot them 
 down with machine guns or starve them in prison. Does she dare 
 do it? Can there be any doubt of the outcome? Germany tried 
 it on Belgium and England will tread the same path as Germany 
 if she persists in her course. Not only has England to respect 
 the wishes of Ireland, but she now fully understands, I hope, what 
 she did not in 1776, that a decent respect for the opinions of man¬ 
 kind bids her halt. 
 
 It is no longer a fight between Ireland and England, but a fight 
 between England and the enlightened opinion of mankind, and she 
 is fast learning that the world will no longer let her hide behind 
 the false cry of protection for Ulster. 
 
 Senator Moses. Mr. O’Flaherty, I want to ask you a question or 
 two. You stated that in your opinion a plebiscite "taken in Virginia 
 would show a vote of four to one in favor of the freedom of Ireland? 
 
 Mr. O’Flaherty. No; I did not say that. I said a majority. Did 
 I sav four to one ? 
 
 Senator Moses. I so understood you. 
 
 Mr. O’Flaherty. 1 did not mean to say that. 
 
 Senator Moses. A majority of the people of Virginia would favor 
 the freedom of Ireland and would so express themselves ? 
 
 Mr. O’Flaherty. I said they would if there was a plebiscite. I 
 believe they would so declare themselves. I have never seen a Vir- 
 
 f inian yet that was not in favor of freedom, and especially the free- 
 om of Ireland. 
 
 Senator Moses. What attitude do you think they would take in 
 Virginia on a plebiscite on the league of nations? 
 
 Mr. O’Flaherty. I would not want to answer that. If you would 
 come around and ask me as a lawyer I would not want to answer that. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 879 
 
 STATEMENT OF IIQIL V/. BOTJRKE COCKRAN. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Mr. Chairman, I desire now to present the last 
 speaker of the hearing. I want to say first, a word of thanks, and to 
 reserve the right for filing statements, which you gave some time ago, 
 from a great many people from different parts of the country. I 
 shall not take up further time now, except to present one of the'fore- 
 most men of the country and of the Irish race, a scholar, a student of 
 affairs, a statesman, and an orator, Hon. William Bourke Cockran, of 
 New York. 
 
 Mr. Cockran. Mr. Chairman and Senators, I would like to begin 
 by answering some questions that were propounded this morning to 
 gentlemen who appeared here in opposition to this proposed League 
 of Nations. One of the most important was that of Senator Borah, 
 who asked if it were true, as some gentlemen have contended on the 
 floor of the Senate, that if this League of Nations be established it 
 would prove a very effective agency through which Ireland could 
 obtain her independence. I take it that Senator Brandegee’s ques¬ 
 tion was put in amplification of Senator Borah’s inquiry, because he 
 said Senator Walsh made practically the same statement in the course 
 of debate. 
 
 Senator Brandegee. I did ask such a question; but I did not know 
 that Senator Borah had previously asked it. 
 
 Mr. Cockran. 1 shall, therefore, answer both Senators together. 
 I think that Senator Walsh supplied the answer to his own conten¬ 
 tion most effectively. He said, as I recollect, that there were three 
 means by which a subject nation could effect its independence. One 
 was by consent of the governing nation, the other was by revolt of 
 the subject people themselves, the third was by outside intervention, 
 and he claimed great credit for the proposed League of Nations, 
 because it prohibited but one of those methods of relief, leaving the 
 other two open and available. The objection to this position is that 
 no nation ever did achieve its independence by consent of the domi¬ 
 nant power, or by naked action of its own people. Every successful 
 revolution of which I have any knowledge was effected tnrough out¬ 
 side support. The American Colonies would not have been free but 
 for the intervention of France. Cuba would still be under the domi¬ 
 nation of Spain but for the intervention of this country, and Greece 
 would still be languishing under the heel of the Turk if it had not 
 been for the assistance of Christendom. So that when Senator Walsh 
 says that by this treaty subject nations are deprived of but one 
 avenue of escape from servitude, the answer is that they are deprived 
 of the only one through which escape can be effected. 
 
 There is another question which Senator Brandegee asked that I 
 think ought to be answered. He inquired whether appeals are 
 allowed from decisions by a single official committing Irish men and 
 women to jail for long periods. At this time Ireland is practically 
 under martial law—which means no law at all—or what is virtually 
 its equivalent, “The defense of the realm” act. Everybody under¬ 
 stands that martial law is suspension of law, substituting for law 
 which is a regular fixed rule of conduct, the whim or judgment of a 
 single official. In Ireland, under the present system, the people are 
 governed by two whims, either one of which constitutes the rule of 
 conduct for the population. One is the whim of the commanding 
 
880 
 
 THE AT Y OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 military officer, and the other is the whim of an official called a resi¬ 
 dent magistrate, apparently for the reason that he is never a resident 
 of the locality in which he officiates. The expression, “R. M.,” 
 officially intended to signify resident magistrate, will describe him 
 much more correctly as “removable magistrate.” He is the only 
 magistrate under the whole British system who is removable at the 
 pleasure of the Crown. I need not remind the chairman of this body 
 that the chief fruit gained by the revolution of 1688 was termination 
 of the system under which judges were removable by the Crown, and 
 under which they were, in the language of Lord Macaulay, not cham¬ 
 pions of truth and justice, but “greedy and ferocious butchers/’ eager 
 to satisfy every demand of despotism. 
 
 The removable magistrate always dreads removal, and the only 
 way to avoid it is by delivering the judgment which the prosecuting 
 officei’3 desire. The effect is that if a man makes a speech, as Mr. 
 Walsh told you, advocating the Republic—nay, if ho utter a word 
 which the police dislike—he is promptly haled before either a drum¬ 
 head court-martial or one of these resident magistrates and con¬ 
 demned without any chance of appeal to the hideous indignities 
 which have been described so forcibly here to-day. Nothing could 
 illustrate more strikingly the conditions against which Irishmen are 
 in revolt than this deliberate establishment in Ireland by the English 
 Government of a judicial system so fruitful of abuse that Englishmen 
 themselves rose in revolution to drive it from their own country. 
 
 When conditions somewhat similar, though I do not think they 
 were quite so onerous, existed in Cuba, the chairman of this com¬ 
 mittee, and I think many others of its members, were quick to insist 
 that intervention to stop those outrages became a task imposed upon 
 us by our primacy of civilization; that continuance of a government 
 which had become perverted from its natural functions of defending 
 peace and order to perpetrating the very outrages on justice which 
 government is organized to prevent, was an injury to civilization 
 which all the forces of civilization should combine to remove. And 
 we, as chief among those forces, drew the sword and ended that 
 abominable system in Cuba. A worse s}"stem exists to-day in Ire¬ 
 land. It can be terminated, as far as we can see now, by no means 
 except the influence of this American Republic, and we are here to 
 protest against any treaty, League of Nations, or whatever it may be 
 called, that will exclude consideration of the monstrous conditions 
 that afflict Ireland from the jurisdiction of the conscience of civili¬ 
 zation, of which the Senate of the United States has always been the 
 foremost and best exponent. 
 
 I pause for a moment to say that if there be any other Senator 
 who wishes to ask me about present conditions in Ireland I will be 
 very glad to answer him. If nobody cares to put a question, I shall 
 proceed to discuss the treaty now before you purely from an Ameri¬ 
 can standpoint. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the gentlemen who preceded me have all said, with 
 great force and feeling, that while they are of the Irish race they are 
 of American birth, and that they love above all other things the 
 country in which they were born. I am an Irishman by birth as 
 well as by blood. And the reason I am here is that I do not want 
 the Government whose shelter from my earliest youth I was resolved 
 to seek, whose benefits I have enjoyed, to be emasculated, impaired, 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERM AH Y. 
 
 881 
 
 or destroyed, as I believe it will bo, if this treaty is ratified. And in 
 saying this I speak not alone for myself—my race i3 well-nigh run— 
 but for my entire generation and the generations that are to follow. 
 The light that inspired me and millions like me to cross the seas I 
 hope the Senate will not suffer to be extinguished, but that through 
 your action now it will be maintained strong and effulgent for all the 
 children of men throughout the world. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, whether the right of this country to interfere—at 
 least so far as to exert its moral influence—for deliverance of Ireland 
 from conditions that are a scandal to civilization shall be preserved 
 or whether it is to be renounced and destroyed by ratification of 
 this treaty, is not an Irish question. It is not a question affecting 
 solely England’s domestic politics, as some gentlemen have con¬ 
 tended. ft is an international question, because it is a question 
 affecting the peace, and, therefore, the welfare of the entire world. 
 Judge Cohalan has told you there can he no peace throughout the 
 world until Irish discontent is composed. This is not—as many 
 might say—a mere expression of exaggerated rhetoric. It is the 
 sober, accurate statement of a fact which all history attests. 
 
 It is certainly one fact of history which none can dispute that 
 every great war which became general—every one became general 
 by England’s entrance into it—and which has scourged the world 
 for the last four centuries, that is to say since the emergence of 
 modern civilization from the wreck of feudalism, has had its begin¬ 
 ning in Ireland—every one, without exception. 
 
 This last war which has just closed, we all know was caused by the 
 German Emperor’s belief that civil commotions in Ireland made 1914 
 the period when he could strike his long-meditated blow for world 
 dominion, with the strongest hope of success. The great wars of 
 the French Revolution which culminated in the Napoleonic wars, 
 began with representations of the united Irishmen through Wolfe 
 Tone to the revolutionary government in France that the conditions 
 then prevaling in Ireland—brought about by the deliberate recall of 
 Lord Fitzw'illiam and the refusal of concessions which had been 
 promised to the Irish people—had made the land ripe for rebellion. 
 The hostile manifestations by the French people and their govern¬ 
 ment which these representations provoked, were the chief causes 
 that led Pitt reluctantly to join the alliance against France. The 
 attempt of Ploche’s expedition to land in Ireland, which was frus¬ 
 trated when his ships were blown by a gale out of Bantry Bay in 
 1796, marked the real beginning of that desperate struggle between 
 England and Franco, which after ravaging Europe for a generation 
 ended at Waterloo. At the close of the seventeenth century, it was 
 the intervention of Louis XIV in aid of the Irish attempt to maintain 
 James II in possession of his crown which brought about the Grand 
 Alliance against him, that afterwards as the war of the Spanish 
 succession plunged Europe in the disastrous conflict that was set¬ 
 tled by the peace of Utrecht. The great war between Elizabeth and 
 Philip II of Spain for control of the seas began with a descent of 
 Spanish and Portugese soldiers on the coast of Kerry, who were all 
 killed to a man after they had surrendered to Sir Walter Raleigh, 
 and whose massacre is the only cloud on tlio fame of that knigktliest 
 figure among Elizabethan warriors. 
 
882 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Why is it that every world war, if not actually caused by Irish dis¬ 
 content, has yet made Ireland the theater of its first beginnings? 
 This can not be due to a mere fortuitous combination of circum¬ 
 stances. My purpose is to show that the condition of Ireland has 
 been a constant invitation to every country with a grievance against 
 England to strike her at that spot where she was believed to be vul¬ 
 nerable, and where she will continue to be vulnerable just so long as 
 the oppressions against which the Irish people have struggled for eight 
 centuries are suffered to exist. So that the Irish question is not a 
 matter that affects England and Ireland alone, and one which there¬ 
 fore can be called domestic. It is one that has affected the peace of 
 the world for four centuries and which will continue to affect it—in 
 the very nature of things—so long as it is permitted to remain an 
 open sore in the side of Christendom. To compose this difficulty and 
 settle it is a task imposed upon the statesmanship of civilization, 
 and, therefore, it rests peculiarly on your shoulders, Senators, charged 
 as you are at this moment with responsibility for the conditions under 
 which peace is to be reestablished throughout the civilized world. 
 
 Probably the greatest difficulty in dealing with the Irish question 
 is to understand just what it is. It has been so misrepresented—and by 
 the greatest masters of ingenuity in misrepresentation that the world 
 has ever seen—that many men, ordinarily well informed, are in 
 doubt as to just what it is that causes the Irish complaints. We are 
 told that other countries have been conquered as Ireland has been, 
 and yet they have long since ceased to complain of the conquest, or 
 even to think about it. We are told that Irish grievances are fanciful, 
 not real; that they are not caused by injuries which are actual, but 
 by recollection of ancient injuries springing from laws which have long 
 since been repealed. We are told that Ulster is prosperous and con¬ 
 tended while the rest of Ireland is discontented and poor because its 
 people are improvident, shiftless, idle; and that this demand for 
 Irish independence merely embodies—while it disguises—the desire 
 of an improvident, shiftless, idle majority to obtain—and abuse— 
 the power of taxation over a thrifty and prosperous Irish minority. 
 
 It is also said that there is a religious question involved; that 
 Ireland’s refusal to acknowledge the authority of England is but the 
 intolerance entertained by one religious sect against another—the 
 disposition of Catholics to oppress and drive Protestants from the 
 country. These, I think, are all the grounds on which are based 
 opposition to recognition of the Irish republic. They are set forth 
 in a brief submitted to this committee by certain persons claiming to 
 speak for Irish Unionists, which I have just been permitted to read. 
 Now, if these statements are true, if Ireland has been reduced to its 
 present condition by the faults or vices of her own people, sympathy 
 for them would be useless. They are incapable of improvement. 
 They must inevitably disappear from the earth which they encumber 
 and discredit. But if the evils which afflict the Irish people be the 
 direct result of laws which have produced intolerable conditions, that 
 still exist although the laws themselves have been repealed, and if it be 
 true that England has shown she is incapable oi doing justice in 
 Ireland, even when a majority of the English people are really anxious 
 that it should be done, and the English Parliament solemnly resolved 
 to do it, then there can be but one outcome. Either English rule in 
 Ireland must be ended or the Irish people must be exterminated. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 883 
 
 That is the alternative, I think it is entirely capable of demonstra¬ 
 tion that the Irish people can not be exterminated, and extermination 
 being impossible, emancipati(fn is imperative. 
 
 Let me explain to you why it is that although these oppressive 
 laws have all been repealed, the conditions thev produced still con¬ 
 tinue. All the history of Ireland ever since the first Norman invasion 
 has been an unbroken record of conquests, and seizure of lands—first 
 the devastation of land always followed by confiscation. But neither 
 conquests not confiscation sufficed to keep the country permanently 
 impoverished. From the first landing of Strongbow in 1172 down to 
 the final overthrow of Irish independence by William III, the Irish 
 people after each invasion and devastation restored prosperity with a 
 celerity and completeness that have been marvels to all historians. 
 
 Mountjoy, under Elizabeth, reported to the Queen that eve^thing 
 capable of supporting life in Ireland had been burned to the roots, 
 that the whole Irish population had been exterminated, except a few 
 fugitives who had taken refuge in morasses where they could not be 
 reached, but where, for lack of food, they must inevitably starve. 
 And yet in the very next reign Ireland was blooming like a garden. 
 In the time of Charles I the prosperity of Ireland had already awak¬ 
 ened the envy and cupidity of Englishmen; but the Irish, with that 
 peculiar sense of loyalty, which is one of their characteristics—often 
 misdirected because carried to excess—having embraced the side of 
 the King, fell under the vengeance of Cromwell. Again the island 
 was devastated with fire and sword. The whole of the land east of the 
 Shannon was confiscated. The entire native population outside of 
 many thousands who were slain, and other thousands sold into cap¬ 
 tivity, was transported west of the Shannon to a soil which was 
 believed to be so sterile that it could not afford subsistence to human 
 life. Cromwell’s brief statement of his policy was that the Irish must 
 go “to hell or to Connaught.” Well, they went to Connaught, but 
 they did not go to hell [laughter],Because there was always one Irish 
 champion whom, some way or other, the British arms could never 
 overcome, and that was the Irish girl. Any Englishman who re¬ 
 ceived land and settled upon it soon fell under her influence. That 
 was already so clearly apparent in the time of Richard II that he 
 passed the statute of Kilkenny forbidding any Englishman who had 
 received land in Ireland from marrying an Irish woman. But the 
 Irish girl was too strong for statutes. She continued to marry the 
 English settler in the teeth of all prohibitions, and the offspring of 
 those marriages were the strongest Irish patriots. 
 
 Although the land had been laid waste with a fury hardly ever 
 paralleled in the annals of mankind by the English Parliamentary 
 forces, first under Cromwell and after him under Ireton and Ludlow, 
 yet when William III in the next generation faced a patriot Irish 
 army, a large part of it was composed of the sons of those Ironsides to 
 whom Cromwell granted land in Ireland. After that dreadful Crom¬ 
 wellian devastation the recovery of her prosperity by Ireland in the 
 reign of Charles II is declared by Macaulay to be tiie marvel of all 
 history. It is acknowledged even by Fronde—who will not be sus¬ 
 pected of any partiality toward Ireland—that in the reign of Charles 
 II practically the entire transportation of goods by sea from the Old 
 World to the New was carried on in Irish bottoms. Irish cattle and 
 horses commanded the highest prices in English markets, and Irish 
 woolen products were considered to be the very finest in the world. 
 
 135549°—19-9 
 
884 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Almost immediately after bis accession this king for whose father 
 Ireland had incurred the resentment and fury of Cromwell, yielding 
 to representations by merchants of Bristol, excluded Ireland from 
 the operation of the navigation act. The effect of this was a total 
 destruction of the Irish shipping trade, from which it has never 
 recovered. Next, in obedience to a demand of English agricultural 
 interests, exportation of Irish cattle and horses to England was 
 prohibited. That reduced property in livestock to one-tenth of its 
 former value. But the woolen industry remained, and probably from 
 the fact that the energies of the country were now mainly directed 
 to it, and the whole capital of the nation largely absorbed in it, the 
 manufacture of Irish cloth expanded to a degree unapproached in 
 any other country of the world. 
 
 But when William III finally established his authority by the 
 victories of Aughrim and the Boyne, and by his treason at Limerick 
 the surrender of which he accepted on terms that permitted the 
 garrison to march out of the city and the country, while at the same 
 time guaranteeing to the Irish people the right to practice their faith, 
 prosecute their trade and retain their property—a treaty that was 
 violated the moment the Irish army had departed from Ireland), 
 then the system was adopted which Edmund Burke has described in 
 words probably familiar to every one of you. He said the Irish 
 penal code was “as well fitted for the oppression, impoverishment and 
 degradation of a feeble people and the debasement in them of human 
 nature as has ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of manb 
 That system produced the conditions which to-day afflict and distress 
 the Irish people and which can be ended only by ending the dominion 
 of England over the country. 
 
 After all former confiscations and devastations the country 
 recovered rapidly because the people were allowed to resume posses¬ 
 sion of the land. But the devilishly ingenious system adopted by 
 William III and his immediate successors precluded any possibility 
 of an Irishman being able to obtain any part of the land on which 
 he lived. 
 
 A succession of statutes enacted during 50 years resulted in a body 
 of laws under which no Catholic—that is to say no native Irishman— 
 could hold land. The whole surface of the island had been confis¬ 
 cated. The original owners of the soil were allowed to dwell upon it 
 merely as tenants at will. The confiscated lands were not bestowed, 
 as in former cases, upon English soldiers who settled in Ireland, but 
 upon favorites of the English court in large areas of 5,000, 10,000, 
 15,000 and even 30,000 acres, who never lived in Ireland, who never 
 intended to live in it, who seldom if ever visited it. Every Catholic 
 was prohibited not merely from holding land but from leasing it for 
 a period longer than 5 years. He could not own a horse worth over 
 5 pounds. If a Catholic appeared in a public place mounted on a 
 horse any Protestant could take possession of the animal by tendering 
 the rider a 5-pound note. Beyond impoverishing the Irish people it 
 was sought to accomplish their degradation by forbidding the educa¬ 
 tion of youth. The only element of the community capable at that 
 time of imparting education was the clergy, and the priest who taught 
 a school was declared guilty of a capital offense. The spectacle was 
 common of a priest’s dead body hanging in chains, executed for no 
 other offense than that of having undertaken to instruct an Irish 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 885 
 
 boy. Not content with seeking to accomplish the intellectual degra¬ 
 dation of the people these statutes sought to corrupt their morals by 
 undermining the foundations of the family. The son who accused 
 the father of being a Catholic and proved it could at once take posses¬ 
 sion of the estate. The wife who informed on her husband was at 
 once accorded a separate and independent interest in his property. 
 So that wifely loyalty and filial piety; every emotion which in civilized 
 countries is considered necessary to the well-being of a communitv, 
 and therefore to be encouraged by government, was perverted in 
 Ireland to the injury of morals and the disruption of society. 
 
 Under this system the people hardly ever came in contact with the 
 owners of the soil. In almost every instance an agent represented 
 the alien landlord. The value and efficiency of that agent were de¬ 
 termined by the amount of rent which he could extort from the un¬ 
 fortunate occupants of the land. If a man by dint of arduous labor 
 improved the soil he occupied and made it more valuable, the agent 
 at once descended upon him and raised the rent. Not merely were 
 all the fruits of his own labor confiscated hut all his neighbors were 
 promptly informed that unless they made their soil equally fruitful 
 and raised the same amount of crops, that is to say, paid the same 
 rent, they would be evicted. And eviction was death. Not merely 
 was industry made unprofitable by this hellish system; it was made 
 unpopular. The laborious man did not benefit himself, but he 
 brought disaster upon his whole neighborhood. The unfortunates 
 who were evicted were loft to starve on the highways. There was 
 no other occupation in which they could find a livelihood because, 
 by a refinement or cruelty that is almost inconceivable, the only in¬ 
 dustry that survived the hostile legislation of Charles II—the woolen 
 industry—was entirely destroyed by William III. It was not taxed 
 out of existence. It was not made to bear burdens imposed avowedly 
 for support of the State, which prevented it from bemg prosperous. 
 It was prohibited absolutely and unconditionally. All existing fac¬ 
 tories were suppressed and the people were forbidden, under heavy 
 penalties, from attempting to engage in the woolen trade. More 
 than that, the Irish wool, at that time—the Australian wool not yet 
 having become available for the world’s necessities—was of a pecu¬ 
 liarly valuable character. Not merely was the manufacture of woolen 
 goods prohibited in Ireland but exportation of Irish wool was pro- 
 liibited to any place except six English cities, the idea being that the 
 English manufacturers by these restraints would be enabled to 
 obtain Irish wool on his own terms. But there was an extensive 
 woolen industry in the low countries where a great demand arose for 
 Irish wool as soon as its manufacture was suppressed in Ireland. 
 
 Wool that would bring 6 pence at Bristol commanded 1 shilling and 7 
 pence in Ypres and in other Flemish towns. Quite naturally smug¬ 
 gling of Irish wool to the Continent became one of the chief occupa¬ 
 tions of the Irish people. But the worst feature of this oppressive 
 measure was not the loss of money or of property that it entailed, 
 jt was this: Wool being contraband, trade in it could not he prose¬ 
 cuted through bills of exchange and other devices of banking which 
 govern commerce. It could only be bartered for some commodity 
 not easily discovered, for everywhere the Irish coast was patrolled 
 by British officers cliarged with the duty of preventing smuggling 
 where they could, and punishing the smugglers where prevention 
 
886 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 was impossible. Wool was exchanged mainly for Flemish wines. 
 This extensive importation of wines was the cause and the beginning 
 of that intemperance that has been the curse, Senator [turning to 
 Senator Phelan], of your country and of mine, of your race and 
 mine, for 250 years. Before the beginning of the seventeenth cen¬ 
 tury the Irish were a temperate race. But the example of the well- 
 to-do consuming expensive wines soon caused a demand for coarser 
 and cheaper intoxicants by the less prosperous. To meet this 
 demand the manufacture of illicit whisky became extensive and the 
 people gradually sank into that dreadful intemperance from which 
 they have suffered both at home and abroad ever since. Mr. Chair¬ 
 man, the curse of this intemperance has been Ireland’s, the shame 
 of it is England’s. 
 
 I am not saying this on my own authority. Here again, sir, I am 
 quoting from James Anthony Froude—the apologist of English 
 excesses in Ireland—who, indeed, seems to complain that if these 
 enormities had gone further the race would have been exterminated 
 and the Irish question settled finally and without appeal. 
 
 Now it is quite true that these proscriptive laws have all been 
 repealed. They began to disappear in the latter half of the eighteenth 
 century. And it is to the credit and glory of this country that their 
 disappearance began when fugitive Irishmen—Presbyterians who fled 
 from the enforcement of the test acts and settled m Pennsylvania, 
 and Catholics who had fled from other parts of the Island—were 
 found fighting side by side under the banner of Washington for free¬ 
 dom, justice, and right. FTp to that time religious proscriptions were 
 not confined to Ireland. They were universal. They were based on 
 the assumption that anything like diversity of religious faith among 
 the people of a State weakened it, and therefore, it should be pre¬ 
 vented by the Government. The Hugenots were placed under serious 
 disabilities in France, so were the Catholics in England. But in 
 Ireland it was the distinctive feature of these proscriptive measures 
 that they were not intended to discourage Catholicism or encourage 
 Protestantism, but to degrade the whole people by plunging them 
 into ignorance, and by corrupting every avenue through which could 
 be reinforced those virtues and qualities that are considered essential 
 to the well-being of every State. In Ireland the faith professed by 
 the people was proscribed with a violence which nowadays can 
 hardly be understood. And this fact must be borne in mind when 
 you consider the Irish question. It is the only country in the world 
 where the people have remained steadfast to a faith that had been 
 proscribed. In every other country the people adopted in a body 
 the religion that its Government established. England became al¬ 
 most uniformly Protestant, or at least non-Catholic under Henry 
 VIII; almost uniformly Catholic again under Queen Mary; Protestant 
 once more under Queen Elizabeth; and it was ready for another 
 change to Catholicism—according to the historians—if James II had 
 but governed with a little more sense. And so the religious complex¬ 
 ion of the French people was decided by the result of the religious 
 wars. 
 
 But in Ireland the majority of the people remained immovably 
 attached to the faith that was proscribed and prohibited under 
 drastic penalties, though they had to sacrifice for it not merely every 
 element of property they possessed but every hope of improving their 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 887 
 
 condition. The extraordinary thing about their tenacity in this 
 respect is that it was maintained, without those aids to fervor which 
 the Catholic liturgy affords. Such a thing as a great religious cere¬ 
 monial had not occurred in the country, at the time of which we are 
 speaking, for 150 years. Their lands confiscated, their faith pro¬ 
 scribed, they practiced the rites of their church crouching in garrets 
 and hiding in out-houses. Driven from the towns and villages, they 
 took refuge in some mountain glen, and there, under the broad 
 canopy of heaven, the rains falling on them, oftentimes knee-deep in 
 mud, with sentinels posted at each end of the glen watching for the 
 priest hunter, who was an established feature of these conditions, all 
 cotemporary writers agree in saying they worshipped with a fervor 
 never shown in the stateliest cathedral ever raised by the hands of 
 piety to the worship of God. Even after they had regained the right 
 to practice their faith it has been remarked that they showed very 
 little regard for its ceremonials. But nothing could swerve them from 
 attachment to its tenets and teachings. And as they remained immov¬ 
 ably attached to their faith, so also have they always been unswerv¬ 
 ingly steadfast in maintaining their national life. It is a peculiar 
 feature of this determination to maintain their national existence that 
 it does not seem to be based on any hope for the future. This is 
 clearly reflected in their poetry, which is perhaps the most melancholy 
 in the world, as it certainly is among the most beautiful. I am one of 
 those who believe that sorrow has always been the source of exquisite 
 poetry. I have never known a sublime note to be inspired by pros¬ 
 perity. Not merely is there a vein of profound melancholy through 
 all Irish poetry, but it never expresses any hope for the future. Yet 
 there is never a note of despair in it. Every line of it breathes the 
 determination of Irishmen to love the old sod, maintain the old faith, 
 preserve the old race, though they never again should see the light of 
 freedom. Moore describing the Ilarp of Tara, silent, abandoned, the 
 chord alone that breaks during the night, telling the tale of its ruin, 
 concludes: 
 
 Thus Freedom now so seldom speaks, 
 
 The only throb she gives, 
 
 Is when some heart indignant breaks, 
 
 To show that still she lives. 
 
 Freedom has indeed lived in the hearts of Irishmen under all cir¬ 
 cumstances; under the darkest skies without any hope of deliverance. 
 Even when there was no chance for Irish arms to fight for it, there 
 was always an Irish heart ready to break for it. Freedom, though 
 denied them as a possession, has always remained an aspiration from 
 which they never could be separated. Such a people can not be 
 seduced from their ideals nor diverted from asserting their right to 
 nationhood. Such a people can not be dubdued, and, therefore, Sen¬ 
 ators, I submit to you with all frankness and perfect confidence that 
 the only alternative which the Irish question presents is extermination 
 or emancipation of the Irish people. You Senators, to whom is con¬ 
 fided the treaty-making power of this Government, will not suffer the 
 destruction of such a race as this, and if you will not suffer it to be 
 destroyed, then you must insist that it be free. There is no alter¬ 
 native. [Applause.] 
 
888 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Now, with respect to the religious question: It can not be denied 
 that Ireland has been torn by religious antagonism. But the cause 
 of this is perfectly simple. And it should be remembered that when¬ 
 ever the Irish succeeded in establishing control over the government 
 of their own country, as they did at intervals—in 1642 and again in 
 16S8—the first act of the Catholics when they became dominant was 
 to declare absolute religious freedom for all. The reason why religious 
 antagonisms have divided the Irish people is because in that country 
 religion was made the test of political rights and property rights. 
 When a man could be ousted of his property because he was a Catholic 
 (and that by a person bound to him by the closest ties of kinship); 
 when a man could be deprived of the horse he rode by a total stranger 
 on the tender of a 5-pound note because he was a Catholic; when he 
 was excluded from every office under his government and denied the 
 right even to educate his child because he did not profess the faith 
 established by law, it was inevitable that the victims of such oppres¬ 
 sion and the beneficiaries of it would be influenced by hostility against 
 each other. 
 
 I should add here, in order to explain why Ulster was prosperous 
 while the rest of the country sank into misery growing ever deeper, 
 that a totally different system of laws prevailed in the one place 
 from that which governed the other. In Ulster, ever since it3 
 “plantation” by James I, there was in force what is called “Ulster 
 Tenant Right.” Under it the occupant of the soil could till it and 
 improve it with a certainty that every improvement he made was 
 his property to enjoy it while he remained in occupation. 
 
 The landlords had no longer any inducement to remain in the 
 country. Again they became absentees, and the remarkable pros¬ 
 perity produced by that short period of independence was changed 
 to a long, unbroken period of progressive decay. Again the rack- 
 renting agent drew from the soil everything which it yielded beyond 
 what sufficed to afford its cultivators the barest subsistence. And 
 for this chance to live there was the fiercest competition among the 
 members of the wretched population, each one eagerly bidding 
 against all others for the privilege of cultivating the land upon any 
 terms whatever. Under this competition conditions of life sank so 
 low that the Irish peasant never tasted meat from one year’s end to 
 the other. The potato became the sole support of his existence. 
 And when in the years of ’46 and ’47 there was a general failure of 
 the potato crop throughout Europe it was a source of loss to the people 
 in other countries, but in Ireland it caused actual starvation. We 
 often hear of the “famine” in Ireland. But strictly speaking there 
 was no famine. While the people were dying by hundreds of thou¬ 
 sands for lack of food, there passed before their eyes along the high¬ 
 ways droves of cattle, wagons laden with foodstuffs,* all products of 
 their own labor sent out of the country to be sold and the proceeds 
 paid to alien landlords. 
 
 In any other country in the world these abundant supplies would 
 have been seized and the people would have used them to avert 
 hunger. In Ireland an exaggerated sense of property led the people 
 to perish of starvation rather then take what according to law belonged 
 to the landlord. But it is said, Ireland is governed by exactly 
 the same law as England with respect to land. Quite true, but the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 889 
 
 conditions established under these laws in the two countries are 
 widely different. The English landlord always lives upon his estate, 
 the Irish landlord seldom if ever. The English landlord has always 
 held himself to be the chief of an industrial family, the head of a great 
 industrial organization, dividing the whole product of the soil with 
 those who have aided in cultivating it. 
 
 I know of nothing more impressive in civilized life than the manner 
 in which these English lords of the soil exercise their ownership 
 over it for the benefit of the people who cultivate it and for the glory 
 of their comitry. The manor house which to many casual observers 
 is a mere abode of elegant luxury is actually to the great agricultural 
 organization of which its owner is the head, what the countinghouse 
 is to a factory. From it the landlord directs all the energies of his 
 tenants and dependents. This landlord is never “off his job” for a 
 moment. Even in his amusements he is always discharging his 
 duty, fulfilling his task. 
 
 We often hear of the claret-drinking, fox-hunting squire, as though 
 his wholo life were devoted to the consumption of wine and the 
 hunting of foxes, and he does spend a good part of his time in these 
 agreeable occupations. [Laughter.] But when he is hunting over 
 his own fields and those of his neighbors he is scrutinizing his fences 
 and the condition of his farmers’ and laborers’ cottages and comparing 
 them with conditions existing on the estates of other landlords. 
 When he is shooting he may be conscious of nothing except a desire 
 to kill partridge or snipe, but to roach this game he must walk 
 through the stubble in which the birds are concealed and there he is 
 necessarily informed of the manner in which the field is cultivated by 
 his tenant. If the fences are broken, cultivation of the field inefficient, 
 cottages dropping into decay, the tenant is required to explain. 
 If that tenant can show that he is not responsible for these conditions 
 and could not avoid them the landlord himself always feels bound 
 to repair them. If, for instance, the tenant by reason of a large 
 and growing family finds himself unable to continue paying the rent 
 he had previously paid, no English landlord would ever think of 
 evicting him. The opinion of his own order would forbid it. To 
 throw a deserving man out on the highway who for reasons beyond 
 his control was no longer able to pay his rent would be an offense 
 against his obligations as a gentleman, almost worse then cheating 
 at cards. But while public opinion in England makes the landlord 
 a trustee for the benefit of those who under his direction cultivate the 
 soil, the Irish landlord, who seldom lived in the country or saw his 
 property, was under no restraint whatever in dealing with his tenants, 
 rlis solo object was to obtain and enjoy the uttermost penny that 
 his agent could extort from them. And thus it came to pass that 
 the very same man—and I am speaking now, Mr. Chairman, of 
 matters within my own knowledge—who in England is the very 
 embodiment of paternal care for his tenants, would suffer an estate 
 owned by him in Ireland to be administered with a ruthless cruelty 
 which produced conditions difficult for us to conceive in this country. 
 The absentee Irish landlord, though he was oppressive, was not always 
 consciously cruel in the treatment of his tenants. The system made 
 him a tyrant or at least tempted him to tyranny even when he 
 himself was naturally well disposed. 
 
890 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 One man of my own acquaintance who is still living, and w r ho 
 occupies a very prominent position to-day in English public life, 
 the younger son of a great noble, became a naval officer and received 
 from his father when he came of age, a property that yielded about 
 £1,000 a year. This property which lie had never seen was managed 
 by an agent. He went on the turf and in the course of a few weeks 
 the thousand pounds which constituted his annual income passed 
 from his pockets into those of enterprising bookmakers. As was 
 usual with Irish landlords living out of the country, he wrote a 
 letter to his agent asking if he could not send him some more money. 
 The agent answered that the income from his property might easily 
 be doubled. “Why the mischief then don’t you double it,” he 
 asked. “I want to be sure,” the agent answered, “that I will be 
 sustained.” Now this man is quite an extraordinary person, gifted 
 with a mind singularly effective in analysis. Concluding from the 
 agent’s statement that there was something about the matter which 
 needed explanation, he resolved to visit the estate and ascertain 
 for himself the real condition. The agent met him and escorted 
 him over the property, showing him various farms for which the 
 rentals paid he said were entirely inadequate, and finally reached one 
 which seemed to be particularly well kept and prosperous. 1 ‘ There, ” 
 said the agent, “is one of the best farms on the estate. It is easily 
 worth 2 guineas an acre, and all that the tenant pays for it is 2 and 
 6 pence.” When the landlord asked why the higher rental was not 
 obtained for it the agent asnwered that when rentals had been 
 raised on Irish'estates the agents always incurred bitter enmity. 
 This they were prepared to face, but they had not always been sus¬ 
 tained by their principals. And this particular agent before he took 
 any steps to increase rentals wanted to be assured that he would 
 be supported by the landlord in any trouble that might ensue. 
 
 Now, this particular landlord from his entrance into the naval 
 service, had always made it a rule when anything under his authority 
 went wrong to go and ascertain the cause of it for himself. Even 
 after he rose to be an admiral—-I may as well say that the man of 
 whom I speak is Lord Charles Beresford—if an engine on any ship 
 of his fleet was reported out of order he never contented himself with 
 sending an engineer officer to find out what was the matter. He 
 always ordered a boat lowered and went and ascertained it himself. 
 And so when the agent made this statement about the farm renting 
 at w r hat appeared to be such an extraordinarily low rate Lord Charles 
 concluded that he would go and see the tenant personally and get his 
 side of the matter. The following morning he appeared at the 
 cottage door and was welcomed by the occupant, whose name I 
 think was Monahan. To enter a house in Ireland no introduction is 
 necessary. Anyone who appears on the threshold is sure of a cordial 
 reception. After exchanging a few pleasant words with Mr. Monahan, 
 Lord Charles made some observations on the excellence of the farm. 
 Now, an Irishman who receives congratulations on the farm he 
 occupies always discerns in the compliment a potential, if not prob¬ 
 able rise of rental. And so when Lord Charles asked him how it 
 happened that he only paid 2 and 6 pence an acre for land easily 
 worth 2 guineas, the tenant said, “ And may I ask, sir, why you busy 
 yourself about my farm, or the rent I pay?” Whereupon Lord 
 Charles said, “I am your landlord.” And then this man, well-nigh 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 891 
 
 80 years of age, broke down and wept like a child. The dread stroke, 
 which every Irish tiller of the soil who has made it productive always 
 apprehends, seemed to have fallen. In piteous accents he sobbed, 
 “Oh, my lord, for the love of God, don’t take the farm from me. It 
 is true I am paying but 2 and 6 pence an acre for it, but when I came 
 here that land was not worth 6 pence an acre. The value it has 
 to-day is the result of work put into it by me and my boys during the 
 last 50 years.” Four sons, the oldest nearly 50, tne youngest over 
 40 years of age, had all spent their lives in helping him to effect this 
 improvement. “My lord,” ho said, “I will give you half of it, I 
 will pay 1 guinea an acre, but let me keep the rest,” and Lord 
 Charles said, “No, Mr. Monahan, I am sorely in need of money but 
 I would have to be much harder up before I could take away from 
 you the fiuits of j T our life work and of your four sons. Keep your 
 farm at 2 and 6 pence an acre as long as you live.” 
 
 Now, suppose this particular landlord had not taken the trouble to 
 ascertain for himself just how his agent could have increased the 
 rentals of his property, that tenant and his four sons would have been 
 evicted, turned out on the road to die, unless they could obtain 
 enough money to buy a passage to this country. And in just that 
 way and under just such conditions hundreds of thousands—aye, 
 millions—of Irishmen, victims of this accursed system, have been 
 driven from their own hearthstone to seek asylums in this country 
 and other lands beyond the sea. But their love of Ireland instead of 
 diminishing, grew deeper by absence from the soil. That love they 
 have transmitted to tneir children, and to their children’s children, 
 many of whom have never seen the country which they love with,an 
 ardor that is unquenchable. It is this greater Ireland beyond the 
 seas which rises now to denounce that accursed system before the bar 
 of public opinion throughout the world. The conscience of Christen¬ 
 dom has already decreed that the system must end. And I pray, 
 Senators, that you will not, by ratifying the treaty, prevent the 
 United States from proving itself, through all the years to come, as 
 it has been in the years that are past, the most effective agent in 
 enforcing the decrees of civilization in favor of liberty and justice. 
 
 So you see the conditions produced by the abhorrent laws of the 
 eighteenth century have continued down to the present day. The 
 laws themselves have been repealed but the conditions they pro¬ 
 duced remain. It is true that in law Irishmen can now purchase 
 property and hold it without any disqualification on the ground of 
 religion. But practically land in Ireland was, until very recent 
 years, absolutely unattainable; first, because the Irishmen, excluded 
 from all avenues of productive industry for generations, had not the 
 capital wherewith to purchase land. And if by any chance he 
 became possessed of sufficient means to purchase land, it was a point 
 of honor among the landlords not to sell. Thus conditions originally 
 produced by law have been perpetuated through custom. They 
 continued unbroken until the Wyndham act of 1902 was passed. 
 
 The results produced by that measure before the war were amply 
 sufficient to convince the most skeptical that the wonderful industrial 
 efficiency which enabled the Irish, after every devastation of their 
 country, to restore prosperity in an incredibly short space of time 
 so long as they were allowed to regain access to their soil, had not 
 
892 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 deserted them or diminished in the slightest degree. Just consider 
 for a moment the immediate effects of that legislation. Remember 
 that by this measure the Irish land was not taken from the landlord 
 and given to the tenants without compensation of any kind as it 
 had been originally taken from its occupiers. It was taken at a high 
 valuation, and after this high valuation had been fixed by mutual con¬ 
 sent 12 per cent in addition was given to the sellers as a bonus. ’ That 
 was all charged upon the land, the occupier of which was empowered to 
 take possession and to become the absolute owner on paying the 
 total amount of the purchase price in installments extending over 
 62 years—I think that was the number of years. Under that law 
 one-half of the land of Ireland passed into ownership of its occupiers. 
 The transfer involved some twelve hundred thousand transactions. 
 And, what absolutely seems to transcend the possibilities of human 
 capacity, there was not a single default, so far as I know, in fulfilling 
 any of these agreements. Never in the history of man have trans¬ 
 actions on a scale so stupendous occurred without a single breach of 
 agreement. 
 
 Not merely was the letter of every agreement observed by the 
 Irish, but they cultivated the soil thus restored to them with such 
 energy and efficiency that by 1914 they had already effected a won¬ 
 derful revolution in their condition. The cabins—the hideous, 
 noisome cabins which I myself remember, in which we would not 
 suffer a pig to exist now, where human beings, 9 and 10 in number, 
 and animals, if they were lucky enough to have a pig or two, dwelt 
 together promiscuously under a few sods placed against an upright 
 pole, an open space at the top allowing smoke from turf and such 
 articles as they burned, to escape—have all disappeared. Decent 
 white-washed cottages have replaced them. Implements of industry 
 are kept in excellent order. I never saw better horses anywhere 
 than in Ireland while I motored through it in 1913. It seemed as if 
 the Irish people were once more on the very threshold of a prosperity 
 such as had blessed the land between 1782 and 1800—the monuments 
 of which are those beautiful buildings that ornament the city of 
 Dublin to the admiration of visitors from every part of the world. 
 
 At this time while prosperity was returning apace, and prospects 
 brightening steadily, the British Government undertook to pass a 
 measure of home rule, encouraged doubtless by the excellent use 
 which the Irish people had been making of their land. This measure 
 did not in fact provide for home rule at all. The body it proposed 
 to create was not a parliament, but a commission to propose measures 
 for the English Parliament. Certain subjects were relegated to 
 this new body but the power of the English Parliament over it was 
 supreme—so complete that not merely was the right reserved to 
 set aside any act which the Irish Parliament might pass but where 
 that parliament had acted on a subject entirely within its jurisdiction 
 the British Parliament was free to pass a different act, and this act 
 of the Imperial Body was to prevail as the supreme law of the land. 
 Here surely was a measure which the most radical English opponent 
 of Irish home rule could well have afforded to accept. Though it 
 did not establish an Irish Government in any sense of the word yet 
 the Irish representatives who then appeared to speak for the majority 
 of the people, accepted it. And there was every reason to believe 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 893 
 
 that its enactment might effect a complete settlement of this diffi¬ 
 culty which for centuries had disturbed the peace of mankind. But 
 a number of Ulsterites encouraged by leading politicians of England 
 (openly by all the Tories and secretly by many of the so-called Lib¬ 
 erals) resolved to resist by arms the establishment of anything re¬ 
 sembling a government in Ireland even though the limitations of its 
 powers reduced it to little more than a shadow or simulacrum of 
 government. These men were among the most prominent of the 
 community. They organized regiments, paraded them in public 
 reviews and audaciously importea 100,000 stands of arms to be em¬ 
 ployed against the British Government if it undertook to enforce a 
 home rule act. 
 
 Mr. Carson, who had been a high official of the crown, organized 
 what he called a provisional government and one, F. E. Smith, who 
 is not an Irishman, who has not a drop of Irish blood in his veins, 
 who had no connection whatever bv blood or property with the 
 island, came over to Belfast, visited various places in Ulster and 
 joined in arrangements to resist establishment of home rule. After 
 this rebellion had been proclaimed and its forces actually organized, 
 the Irish nationalists, who, mind you, were maintaining in office, the 
 British Government then in power (it did not command a majority 
 in parliament, except by the votes of Irish members) undertook to 
 organize a volunteer force for the purpose of supporting enforce¬ 
 ment of the home rule measure. And then what happened? This 
 Government, maintained in office by Irish votes, forbade by procla¬ 
 mation admission of arms into Ireland, after the Ulsterites had 
 obtained arms sufficient to equip the regiments they had organized 
 for rebellion but before the nationalists volunteers were able to 
 obtain any military equipment whatever. But even this did not 
 satisfy these audacious rebels. Disregarding the proclamation of 
 the Government and flouting its authority they brought a cargo of 
 aims into an Irish port and were suffered to land them without 
 molestation or interference. Their defiance of authority was in 
 fact treated as an excellent joke and became a subject of laughter. 
 Gun running promised to become the favorite sport of these char¬ 
 tered rebels—chartered by the very Government they were defying. 
 But when the nationalists undertook to bring in a cargo of arms the 
 British soldiery appeared upon the spot and with bayonet and bullet 
 prevented them from landing a single rifle, shooting down women 
 and children who happened to be spectators. And so sedition was 
 preached and practised with impunity in Ulster while Irish national¬ 
 ist volunteers when they attempted to sustain the Government 
 were prosecuted and dispersed by order of the very men they kept 
 in office. But even that was not all. 
 
 Under a new T development of the British constitution a measure 
 may become lav/ notwithstanding its rejection by the House of Lords 
 after it has been enacted three times in the House of Commons. This 
 home rule bill had been enacted once, and while the second enactment 
 was in progress the military authorities—not the volunteers—but 
 the regularly organized military forces of the Empire encamped at 
 Kildare—were notified that possible violence in Ulster might require 
 intervention, by the soldiery to overcome it. And forthwith all the 
 high officers, with the exception of Gen. Paget, resigned their commis- 
 
894 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 sions and announced they would not draw their swords to maintain 
 the authority of their Government because it would be drawing them 
 in behalf of a cause which the Irish people supported and against 
 the Ulsterites who were their personal mends and with whose openly 
 
 E ro cl aimed intention to resist by arms the operation of a law enacted 
 y the British Parliament they were in full sympathy. And these 
 mutinous officers, instead of being court-martialed, degraded, dis¬ 
 charged, and shot, were not even questioned. Not merely were they 
 suffered to retain their commissions, but most of them were actually 
 advanced to higher commands. 
 
 Can you wonder at what followed ? The Great War came on. Mr. 
 Redmond, acting for the nationalists, pledged the Irish people to 
 support the British cause. I think he made a capital mistake when 
 he said, that the Irish people would be satisfied to wait for enforcement 
 of the home rule bill after the war was over. However, this may be, 
 certain it is that when the enlistments opened Irishmen went to the 
 colors in great numbers. The nationalist leaders asked that these 
 Irish soldiers be performed separately so that such deeds of valor as 
 they accomplished would redound to the glory of their race. The 
 request was denied. They were drafted into various regiments and 
 companies. But wherever the fortunes of war were desperate and 
 the casualties heaviest there Irishmen were found in numbers far in 
 excess of the proportion they bore to the entire body of the British 
 soldiery. And though they suffered heavier losses than any other 
 men in the English service, their sacrifices were allowed to pass unre¬ 
 warded and indeed unnoticed. 
 
 But worse was to follow. While Irish nationalists were dying by 
 thousands under the British colors, repeating the sacrifices and services 
 of their ancestors at Flanders a century earlier, it was resolved by the 
 British Government to arrest the leaders of the nationalist volunteers 
 and seize such arms as might be found in their possession. That purpose 
 having become known it provoked immediate spontaneous resistance. 
 Without preparation or opportunity to rally even the scanty force 
 they could command these Irishmen arose in revolt. Numbering 
 less than 2,000 they held two entire British divisions at bay for over 
 a week. And when, after a display of gallantry at which the world 
 has wondered, and without having committed any excesses as their 
 bitterest enemies acknowledged they laid down their arms, the 
 leaders (some 17 in number), were shot in cold blood. These men 
 were the very flower of Irish life. The officials who took the lead, in 
 butchering them or in directing their butchery were the very men 
 who had themselves preached rebellion and resistance to the Govern¬ 
 ment. Once more the very best in the land, men of resplendent 
 genius, of virtue personal and civic, absolutely unspotted and untar¬ 
 nished, were slaughtered, and over their dead bodies the basest were 
 rising to conspicuous positions. The same accursed system that 
 raised Emmet to the scaffold and Norbury to the peerage has in 
 these days sent the brightest ornaments of Irish life to stand before 
 a firing squad, and raised to the English woolsack the man who had 
 counselled the course these victims pursued. 
 
 Now this simple narrative of facts which we all remember, demon¬ 
 strates, it seems to me beyond a question, the absolute incapacity of 
 England to do justice in Ireland. Everywhere else her rule may be 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 895 
 
 beneficent. In her own country she maintains a government cer¬ 
 tainly better than any other in Europe. Many think it the best in 
 the world. But in Ireland, by the confession of everyone, her own 
 statesmen included, her attempt to govern the country has been the 
 most wretched failure in the whole range of human annals. The 
 reason for it is plain. It arises from a difficulty that is insuperable. 
 For nearly 250 years all legislation in Ireland has proceeded on the 
 assumption that the Ulsterite is a superior being, and that all other 
 Irishmen are his inferiors. This, though fantastically absurd, is not 
 to be wondered at. Because you can not very well rob a man and 
 then admit that he is your equal or that he is possessed of any 
 merit whatever. You must admit and declare him unfit to enjoy 
 either liberty or property at the same time that you despoil him in 
 order to justify the spoilation. English writers and politicians are 
 driven in self-defense to contend that the Irish are a shiftless, worth¬ 
 less, thriftless race, the Ulsterites embodiments of industrial effi¬ 
 ciency and frugality. In support of the misrepresentation they 
 quote the prosperity of Ulster, always omitting to point out that it 
 enjoyed the essential conditions of prosperous commerce while the 
 rest of Ireland was excluded from them. The different treatment 
 always extended by British Government (no matter what party con¬ 
 trolled it) to the different parts of Ireland, can not be explained 
 upon any other theory. Remember, it was not only English tories 
 who have discriminated against one set of Irishmen in favor of the 
 other. Liberal Englishmen have done it in even a more marked 
 degree. It was a so-called liberal government kept in office by 
 Irish votes that persecuted and suppressed the Irish nationalist 
 volunteers who sought to support the measure of the British Govern¬ 
 ment and encouraged the Ulsterite recalcitrants who proclaimed their 
 intention to rebel against a law which aimed to do a faint measure 
 of justice in Ireland. 
 
 All of which shows conclusively that England can not do justice in 
 Ireland. She is absolutely incapable of it. Even when she has tried 
 to do it, she has failed signally and dismally. I believe that the ma¬ 
 jority of the English people were really anxious to establish home rule 
 in Ireland before the war. They had voted in favor of it. Their rep¬ 
 resentatives in Parliament enacted it, and yet when it came to 
 putting it in operation forces too strong for the Government were 
 able to prevent it. 
 
 And all of this, Senators, I believe, leads to one conclusion. Ireland 
 must be released from this incubus. She must be delivered from this 
 body of death, called English rule. She can not continue to exist 
 under it. She will not. She would not deserve to exist if she accepted 
 these conditions of degradation. She will never accept them. Pier 
 whole history shows that. There is no way in which her national 
 spirit can be quenched. Efforts the most ruthless, backed by the 
 utmost power of England continued through centuries, have failed to 
 destroy Ireland’s nationality. Ail the leagues of nations which might 
 be formed on this earth coufd notkeep Ireland submissive to this wrong. 
 Thank God for it. In saying that for Ireland, 1 think I can say as 
 much for America, too. [Applause.] I do not believe all the powers 
 on earth, organized in a league of nations or otherwise, could keep 
 America submissive under a wrong. [Applause.] I do not believe 
 
896 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 there is any chance that America will be reduced to a position where 
 her people must revolt against her Government in order that justice 
 may remain their birthright. And, therefore, I am as certain as I 
 can be of anything that this treaty will be rejected, root and branch, 
 as an abomination which the American people can not take to their 
 bosoms. There is but one thing necessary now to effect the emanci¬ 
 pation of Ireland and the regeneration of the world. It is that we 
 acknowledge and recognize the simplicities of the situation which 
 this war has created, as Senator Knox described them yesterday, 
 and then govern our course by this infallible guide. What is it that 
 the world needs? Everyone will answer, “Peace.” Of course, it is. 
 But, what is peace ? 
 
 Peace is not merely the removal of contending armies from the 
 field of battle. It means deliverance of the nation from the pre¬ 
 occupation and obsession of wasteful preparations for war. For 
 years before the late conflict began the world was practically in a 
 state of war. It was paying the price of war. Notwithstanding a 
 great increase in the production of commodities prices instead of 
 falling were rising. This increase in the cost of living could be 
 accounted for on no basis except the tremendous expense of sup¬ 
 porting 5,000,000 of men in the very flower of their productive 
 efficiency idle in barracks and equipping them with the weapons 
 which would make them effective in battle. That was a terrible 
 burden before the war. But now if that burden is to continue it 
 must destroy or at least imperil the solvency of the entire world. 
 And an insolvent world must necessarily be a starving world. 
 
 Remember that during the 100 years of peace which followed 
 Waterloo there was an enormous growth of population. That 
 growth was confined almost entirely to the cities; rural populations 
 declined rather than increased. In all those cities there is not a 
 single human being who produces the necessities of his own existence. 
 Five or six millions of people have established themselves on the 
 Hudson River and the East River in what is called the great city of 
 New York. There they live on the contributions of workers from 
 all over the world. Everything that enters into their industry 
 must be contributed from outside the city. Anybody who has ever 
 looked upon those great chimneys and seen the smoke of manu¬ 
 facture rising to the heavens—incense with industry burns before 
 the throne of God—must realize the close interdependence between 
 all human beings in the world to-day. Everything that enters into 
 manufacture, the very stones of the structure in which industry 
 operates, the very beams of the building in which it is sheltered, the 
 raw materials of manufacture, the clothing and food of the worker, 
 all come from outside. The dweller in the cities depends for his 
 subsistence upon the labor of all the world. 
 
 Before the war 4,000,000 of these 5,000,000 people lived literally 
 from hand to mouth. And the same is true of people in every other 
 great city. But now $250,000,000 of the capital by which industry 
 was formerly made effective lias perished. Ten million human beings 
 in the flower of their industrial efficiency are dead, maimed, and 
 rendered inefficient. With this loss of capital and of productive 
 energy how are these mighty populations to continue to be fed, 
 clothed, and housed ? There is but one way. The waste of war and 
 of preparations for war must be ended. All over the world men must 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 897 
 
 put away weapons of conflict and take into their hands implements 
 of industry. If disarmament can be made universal, then this war 
 will be converted from the greatest scourge ever laid upon the backs 
 of the human race into the greatest blessing which a Merciful Provi¬ 
 dence has ever extended to them. It is the unbroken lesson of 
 history that sacrifices imposed on one generation are the necessary 
 price of every great advance material, and moral, accomplished by 
 other generations. The French Revolution, wh Ii caused wars that 
 devastated the Old World for over 20 years, resulted in uprooting 
 survivals of feudalism which had seriously hampered industry, and 
 it was followed by an improvement in human conditions so remark¬ 
 able that when we contrast the conditions of the world during the. 
 last hundred years with its condition during any previous period, it 
 seems as if we were considering two separate planets peopled by a 
 wholly different species of animated beings. 
 
 And after our Civil War, notwithstanding its enormous waste, thr 
 substitution of free labor for slave labor opened a fountain of proi- 
 perity which more than repaired in five years the terrible destruction 
 of battle. And now if we can absorb all the energies of mankind in 
 production of commodities necessary to human subsistence, the 
 ravages of this war will be repaired in five years, and the human 
 family will reach a plane of prosperity higher than it has ever 
 achieved. The world is at the parting of the ways. Either it must 
 take, through disarmament, the path leading upward to prosperity 
 that will be immeasurable, or else through efforts to maintain huge 
 military establishments it must sink through confusion and disaster 
 to ruin which will be irretrievable. Which path shall be chosen ? 
 Your action, Senators, on this treaty will decide. Mr. Chairman, if 
 wo follow the path marked out by this attempt through a new cove¬ 
 nant to perpetuate the conditions from which we hoped that the war 
 would deliver us, if we increase armaments instead of abolishing them, 
 if in a word this proposed treaty is ratified, the league of nations, 
 which it establishes, which is a league not to promote peace but to 
 prohibit peace, as Senator Knox has well said, it will prove to be the 
 greatest curse that has ever blighted the prospects of humanity. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 But I have not the slightest apprehension on this score. Thank 
 God, a spirit of genuine Americanism survives in the Senate which 
 will deliver this country from the peril that threatens it and dispel 
 from our horizon the cloud that darkens it. I think I may say with 
 perfect confidence that since this treaty was laid upon the table of 
 the Senate the discussion which its provisions have evoked has raised 
 the standard of senatorial eloquence and senatorial statesmanship to 
 • a plane higher than ever before attained in its history. [Applause.] 
 I can quote speeches delivered by men who sit around me that can 
 not be paralleled by any delivered in the Senate since its organization, 
 and I do not except even that much-lauded reply of Daniel Webster 
 to Senator Iiayne, of South Carolina. When we realize the wealth of 
 information those speeches disclose, the high spirit of patriotic devo¬ 
 tion they attest, the stern resolution in the teeth of misrepresentations, 
 as ingenious as they are reckless, to maintain the integrity of our 
 institutions, which they establish, nothing in the past history of 
 
898 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 Congress compares with them. But even if the Senate were indif¬ 
 ferent or inefficient there would remain the unerring judgment,, the 
 infallible wisdom, the sensitive conscience of the American people. 
 America has accomplished the greatest things ever achieved in the 
 history of mankind, things which have been so universally recognized 
 as of transcendent value to civilization that even if they could be 
 changed no human being would venture to disturb them. If any¬ 
 body had the power to disturb them and should attempt it, the whole 
 conscience of Christendom would rally to preserve them as priceless 
 possessions of the whole human family. Yet these great achieve¬ 
 ments were attained not through politicians or statesmen, but largely 
 in spite of them. The people have always done better than the poli¬ 
 ticians or statesmen had advised. 
 
 This war which we can all now see was absolutely essential to 
 preservation of our civilization was not a distinctive policy of the 
 President wffio conducted it. He went into a campaign and sought 
 reelection—with perfect sincerity as I believe—upon a proposition 
 that he had kept us out of war. He could not have intended to advise 
 a declaration of war when he called the extra session, because he did 
 that only after failure of a measure recommended by him which did 
 not look toward war but merely to the arming of merchant ships. It 
 was essentially the war of the American people not of the American 
 President. 
 
 The War with Spain was forced upon a reluctant Executive, as I 
 think the chairman of this committee will admit, close as he was to 
 the administration of the very distinguished President who caused its 
 declaration. And the reconstruction of the Southern States after the 
 Civil War was not what anybody had suggested. It is now clear that 
 if either party had had its way the country would not yet have 
 recovered from its ravages. I remember when Mr. Tilden was—as 
 I believed at the time and have not wholly changed my opinion—• 
 cheated out of the office to which he had been elected, 1 thought it 
 was the end of this Government. I thought that the South must 
 remain indefinitely under the cruel heel of oppression, with rival 
 governments in three different States, and that all possibility of re¬ 
 construction on the basis of reconciliation had faded away info limit¬ 
 less distance. Looking back now, I can see that it was the providence 
 of God that put the task of withdrawing the Federal troops from South 
 Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida into the hands of a Republican 
 President, thus making it a common policy of the whole country, 
 which Democrats were delighted to welcome and which Republicans 
 were not in a position to criticize. 
 
 The War of 1812 was forced on President Madison. Senator Knox, 
 who has undoubtedly studied closely the archives of the State De-’ 
 partment, knows that the purchase of Louisiana as we understand it 
 was never contemplated by Thomas Jefferson. He sought only to 
 acquire the Island of Orleans. The purchase of the great territory 
 north of the present boundary of Louisiana was forced on him. It 
 was accepted as a necessary condition by his supporters, and urged 
 as a reason for rejecting the whole treaty by others, on the ground 
 that these desert wilds could never be of any value to us. But the 
 people budded wiser than the statesmen of those years. 
 
 And now, when the greatest emergency that has ever confronted 
 the country is upon us, I believe that the people’s conscience, the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 899 
 
 people’s judgment, and the people’s wisdom, will reinforce the deter¬ 
 mination of these Senators who have already checked, and who I 
 believe will succeed in defeating, the attempt by this treaty to betray 
 the causes and purposes for which the war was fought. I do not 
 charge deliberate treason against anyone, but I do say that betrayal 
 of the causes for which this war was fought and won will be the net 
 result, if the purposes of those who negotiated this treaty shall be 
 accomplished. We are told that even an amendment of this treaty 
 will lead to its rejection. Well, what of that? Suppose it is de¬ 
 feated, could we conceive anything more auspicious? The league of 
 nations which it undertakes to establish is imperfect by the conces¬ 
 sion of everybody. 
 
 The Shantung provision is an abomination. Yet we are told that 
 we must yield to that abomination and make ourselves parties to it. 
 My God, Mr. Chairman, when did it come to pass that the word 
 “must” can be addressed to the American Nation? [Applause.! 
 When this Nation consisted of little more than a few villages strag¬ 
 gling along the Atlantic coast, the suggestion was made that for¬ 
 bearance of the greatest military power in the world at that time 
 could be secured by a substantial advance of money. The answer 
 was given without an instant’s hesitation: “Millions for defense; 
 not one cent for tribute.” [Applause.] 
 
 And, sir, are we now to pay not a tribute of money but a tribute 
 of infamy, by the confession of everybody, in order to establish a 
 league which has not and can not operate for peace, but in the very 
 nature of things, as has been conclusively shown by Mr. Knox and 
 other Senators, must operate to make war frequent, if not perpetual ? 
 Is there in that treaty one single word of which any American should 
 be proud? Does it liberate a single people who seek emancipation, 
 except as an act of vengeance against the countries that were over¬ 
 thrown? Does it hold out a word of hope to nations that are lan¬ 
 guishing in chains and determined to break them? Far from that, 
 it creates new spoliations and makes us a party to them. Without 
 our participation they could not become effective. [Applause.] 
 
 But we are told that we can ratify this treaty and pass a resolu¬ 
 tion declaring that we don’t like these infamies at the very time 
 that we are perpetrating them. Now I can have some respect, at 
 least I can understand the attitude of a man who perpetrates an 
 infamy because he wants to, but I have no patience with a man who 
 after making himself a party to an infamy seeks to excuse himself 
 by saying that he dislikes it. [Applause.] One man is formidable 
 to justice, the other is contemptible in every sense. But thank God 
 the Government of the United States is not going to be contemptible. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 Now, in all -this, I do not intend the slightest reflection on 
 the President of the United States. I think I ought to say that. 
 [Laughter.] No, no; Senators, let me say this to you: I think the 
 place of the President in history is a high one, and I think it is secure. 
 I think it is so secure that it can not be overthrown by anythin" 
 except ratification of this treaty, and against that the Senate is, 1 
 think, immovable. His definition of the cause which led us into this 
 war has become one of the priceless possessions of humanity. The 
 14 points are not dead. They are alive; they are here. [Applause.] 
 
 135549°—19 - 10 
 
900 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 We are appealing to them now, and the appeal will not be in vain. 
 They can never die. 
 
 1 was one of those who sincerely deplored his going abroad. I 
 did not believe then, and I do not believe now, that the President of 
 the United States is ever justified in placing his person under the 
 jurisdiction, or in the power of a foreign Government, especially when 
 he is engaged in a negotiation affecting the sovereignty of the United 
 States. While his person is under foreign jurisdiction he can be 
 coerced in many ways. I think he was coerced in one way which 
 proved effective, and that was by threatening him covertly or openly 
 with some manifestation of disapproval or by withholding from him 
 the applause which they gave him in overflowing measure when he 
 first appeared on the European continent. It is impossible otherwise 
 to account for his acceptance of provisions in this treaty vdiich ho 
 himself declares to be objectionable. But I want to say this: The 
 world which heard the words he uttered wiien uring Congress to 
 declare war became that moment a different world from what it had 
 ever been before. I wrote Mr. Tumulty at that time, and I felt 
 deeply in my soul that this address of the President wmuld pass into 
 history as the most momentous utterance that ever fell from human 
 lips since Pope Eurban II preached the First Crusade at Clermont- 
 Ferrand, over 800 years ago. When he said this war was waged to 
 make the v 7 orld safe for democracy, and men shed their blood to make 
 his declaration effective, it became impossible for the earth which 
 received that libation, ever again to tolerate, in Ireland or anywhere 
 else in the world, conditions those heroes died to overthrow. [Ap¬ 
 plause. 1 
 
 After speaking these words it became as impossible for the Presi¬ 
 dent to come back and set up such a machinery of force to dominate 
 the world, as is embodied in this treaty, as it would have been for 
 Godfrey, of Bouillon, or any other leader of the Crusades to establish 
 Mohammedanism in his own dominion after his return from attempt¬ 
 ing to overthrow 7 it in the Holy Land. Even though the President 
 has himself forsaken the 14 points, the principle embodied in them 
 remains to render the dominion of brute force impossible anywhere 
 within the limits of civilization. 
 
 How the reign of brute force will be abolished in Ireland I can not 
 tell at this moment any more than anyone at the close of our Civil 
 War could have foretold the splendidly successful reconstruction of 
 the Southern States that followed it. I am sure the chairman of this 
 committee will recall that the leaders of the dominant party at that 
 time, men like Charles Sumner and Thaddeus M. Stevens and Oliver 
 P. Morton, patriots of the highest type, believed it would be necessary 
 to take the most drastic precautions against a renewal of secession. 
 On the other hand, the leaders of the Democratic Party in the South 
 believed that they were entitled at once to unconditional restoration 
 of their government and freedom to reestablish their social and 
 economic life as they pleased. A golden mean was struck between 
 the two. Their governments were given back to the southern people 
 when it became clear that there w r ould be no attempt to restore 
 slavery or to fasten the Confederate debt on any part of this country. 
 And then those States which had been ravaged as no other land 
 had been ravaged before, whose industrial system had been sub- 
 
TREATY OF FEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 901 
 
 verted, whose cities had been burned, whose fields had been devas¬ 
 tated, where the last dollar of capital had been expended, rose from 
 the ashes of defeat almost in a night and marched forward to a pros¬ 
 perity greater than that which has blessed any other part of this 
 country. 
 
 So I firmly believe that out of all this discussion, contention, and 
 confusion of views, the thing will emerge which the world needs. 
 And that is disarmament. When disarmament becomes universal, 
 then peace will be firmly established, for the very simple reason 
 that when all nations are disarmed there will not be any means with 
 which any of them can fight against another. Let us, then, insist that 
 the outcome of this war shall be disarmament of all nations. We 
 have the power to enforce this policy and we need not lift a finger to 
 do it. As Senator Knox pointed out yesterday, the whole world is 
 bankrupt. Many nations are still intent on maintaining great arma¬ 
 ments, but they can not support them unless we give them the means. 
 It is certainly impossible for any of them to reorganize its industry 
 and at the same time maintain a great military establishment. The 
 hope of each one is that we will advance it the capital essential to its 
 industrial reorganization, and then it will use its own resources to 
 maintain a great armament on land and sea. 
 
 I do not believe any American would object to aid the restoration 
 of stricken Europe, but I do think it is our paramount duty to insist 
 that before we extend the benefit of our resources to any other 
 country all its own resources be devoted to restoring its industry. 
 We should not aid it while it diverted one penny of its own posses¬ 
 sions to military enterprises. To force universal disarmament, 
 therefore, it is only necessary that this country resume the role 
 which it has played since its organization. 
 
 For the first time in the history of the world a great war has ended, 
 leaving one power able to maintain the greatest armaments on land 
 and sea ana that power does not want to establish them. That 
 power possesses the resources to resuscitate society, and it does not 
 want to exercise the power thus given it for any other purpose than to 
 benefit the whole human family. And now, while we are ready to 
 expend our treasure for the welfare of all the world, what is it that by 
 this treaty we are*asked to do ? As Senator Knox well said yesterday, 
 we are asked to use our resources for regeneration of the world, not 
 according to our own idea of what would be most effective, but by 
 submitting our judgment to that of other nations whose policies 
 have led them to the pass out of which they are crying to us for deliv¬ 
 erance. Now, if there be in all this world any force, country, Gov¬ 
 ernment, or political system better qualified than America to employ 
 enormous resources for the benefit of man land by enforcing justice 
 I am ready, for my part, to see our resources turned over to that 
 superior agency. But where is it ? Where can it be found ? Where 
 is there in the universe any force comparable to the United States 
 as an agency to use unlimited resources for the improvement of 
 human conditions? Such a power or force can not be found. It 
 does not exist. And yet wo are asked to subordinate our control 
 over our own resources to the judgment of nations which I think 
 nobody here will dispute are inferior to us in intelligence and in love 
 of justice. We are asked to give up the greater for the less, to abase 
 
902 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 ourselves from the lofty position to which Providence has assigned 
 us and deliberately sink to a lower level. But it is said that if we 
 maintain control over our own destiny we are in danger of isolation. 
 
 Well, Mr. Chairman our isolation was decreed by Almighty God 
 when he gave us the first place in civilization. Eminence is always 
 isolation. But the eminence which we have always enjoyed is not an 
 isolation which we want selfishly to retain. No; no; no; America 
 invites all the world to end that isolation by coming up and sharing 
 the eminence which she has occupied since the organization of this 
 Republic. [Applause.] From the spirit that has been displayed in 
 this gathering here to-day, I have unbounded confidence that this 
 country will not terminate that eminence by coming down from it 
 and abasing itself to the prejudices and hostilities and cupidities of 
 those European powers that have plunged the world into the welter 
 of blood from which we have just delivered them, and from whose 
 consequences we now hope to shield them. 
 
 Senator Knox has stated, much better than I can state it, the true 
 policy w T e should pursue. When disarmament is secured the nations 
 can not fight. And then an unarmed world will naturally and 
 inevitably produce a league of nations to adjust disputes. While 
 unarmed nations can not fight without at least three years’ preparation 
 there will be disputes as long as there are human beings on the earth. 
 Now, there are but two things that men or nations can do when they 
 engage in disputes; they can either fight about them or they can talk 
 about them. If they have not the means to fight then there is nothing 
 left for them to do but talk about them. And when by disarmament 
 they are placed in a position where all they can do is to talk, they will 
 inevitably take measures to make that talk effective, which means 
 they will establish tribunals or bodies of some description before which 
 these disputes can be adjusted, if they are capable of adjustment. 
 Leagues of nations can not produce peace. But peace can and will 
 produce a league of nations—a true league of nations—a league 
 capable of meeting the requirements of civilization. And with all the 
 world disarmed no nation can be held in subjection against the will 
 of its inhabitants to another. Ireland will be free and every nation 
 now denied the blessings of liberty will obtain them. That, Mr. 
 Chairman, I believe will be the outcome of this situation. It may 
 not come immediately. But come it must and come it will. Any¬ 
 thing else spells not merely danger but ruin to civilization. Mr. 
 Chairman, these are the conclusions which I submit respectfully but 
 most hopefully to this committee. Peace—not merely cessation of 
 war, but cessation of preparations for war—is absolutely essential to 
 human existence under the conditions which now govern the world. 
 
 Peace must be established in Ireland before it can be made perma¬ 
 nent throughout the world. Peace can not be established in Ireland 
 by England. Eight centuries of history prove that. The Irish 
 people who have resisted foreign domination for nine centuries will 
 not submit to it, even though an attempt to force it upon them were 
 made by a thousand leagues of nations. The league of nations here 
 proposed is an abomination, an attempt to use the conscience of 
 Christendom to sanction and perpetuate wrongs which morality and 
 justice condemn. • But although judgment and good sense may have 
 departed from quarters where we have a right to expect that they 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 903 
 
 would he found, yet we feel profoundly confident that here in this 
 body the wisdom of the fathers will be vindicated by such a display 
 of patriotism, such an exercise of vigilance, as will insure to this 
 people the rights to which they were born, the rights which some of 
 us who came here from other lands have acquired through the opera¬ 
 tion of our constitutional system; and by maintaining this constitu¬ 
 tion intact, you Senators will become the effective instruments 
 ordained by Providence to keep trimmed and shining before the eyes 
 of all men the lamp which will guide their footsteps, to freedom, to 
 justice, and to unending prosperity. 
 
 Judge Cohalan. Gentlemen of the committee, we thank you on 
 behalf of those who have come here, and on behalf of those who have 
 had the opportunity of addressing you. 
 
 BRIEF OF PROTEST. 
 
 (The brief of protest heretofore referred to, filed in opposition to 
 the arguments submitted at the morning session, is as follows:) 
 
 Thte Foreign Relations Committee, 
 
 Senate of the United States. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Committee : We beg to present a formal protest to the 
 attempt of representatives of a faction in Ireland, known as the Sinn Fein 
 party, or of kindred organizations favoring this movement in the United States, 
 to have the so-called Irish question thrust into the discussion in the Senate 
 of the peace treaty and the league of nations. 
 
 In presenting our brief of protest we do so as American citizens of Irish 
 birth, and not as agents of a foreign government, nor as local political faction- 
 ists with an ax to grind. We'are just plain, hard-working American citizens, 
 engaged in various commercial and professional callings, prompted by a legiti¬ 
 mate sentiment for the land of our birth and by a whole-hearted devotion to the 
 land of our adoption. 
 
 We are not here, sirs, to argue either for or against the peace treaty and 
 the league of nations, but we are here through your gracious courtesy to de¬ 
 clare ourselves opposed to the thrusting of a foreign political issue into the 
 discussion of that great subject. 
 
 Our opposition, gentlemen, is based on the following arguments: 
 
 • 
 
 I. the argument of right. 
 
 The league of nations is a proposal to unite the forces of the allies who 
 fought during the late war to preserve the future peace of the world. This 
 faction in Ireland has no right to be considered in the discussion, for they failed 
 to support the allies in that war and failed to do their part in the struggle. 
 We present two simple statements in our argument: 
 
 A. They failed to support by sentiment. Their .propaganda during the war 
 period was hurtful to the allied cause. 
 
 B. They failed to support by deed. They gave and comfort to the foe by 
 creating strife and turmoil at home. The British Government, in order to 
 quiet this faction could not and did not enforce conscription in Ireland. 
 Granted they had a real cause to present at the bar of American judgment, 
 they have no more right to be heard at this time, when they failed to support 
 the allied cause, than the foe has to be heard at this juncture. 
 
 II. THE ARGUMENT OF FACT. 
 
 It is stated by this element that Ireland has not self-government and is 
 therefore entitled to be heard. We are prepared to testify by actual experi¬ 
 ence that Ireland has self-government on the following basis: 
 
 A. Ireland has the franchise—franchise in local as well as national govern¬ 
 ment. 
 
 B. Ireland has representative government. It has representatives of the 
 people, by the people, and for the people. 
 
904 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 C. Laws are made by the Parliament in the same manner as for England, 
 Scotland, or Wales—the procedure is the same in each case. 
 
 It is further stated by this element that Ireland is suppressed by Britain. 
 
 We reply: 
 
 First. It is not suppressed religiously. Freedom of worship is granted to 
 all. and is enjoyed by all. 
 
 Second. It is not suppressed industrially. Ireland possesses some of the 
 largest plants in various industries to be found in the world, for example, 
 shipbuilding, linen, tobacco, rope, collar and shirt, distilling, etc. The lace 
 industry of Ireland is proverbial. Ireland is enjoying prosperity now to a 
 vast degree. 
 
 III. THE ARGUMENT OF HISTORY. 
 
 The claim is made that Ireland was and should be a nation. This claim is 
 false and the assumption is without historical grounds. Ireland neither during 
 the Druidic nor the Christian periods has been one whole, undivided nation. 
 The four provinces represent the smallest areas of nationhood. Historically, 
 Ireland has had many kings and rulers at the one time, but never one king or 
 supreme chief. Only under British rule has Ireland ever approached unity 
 in these historic divisions. The present political divisions in Ireland are re¬ 
 ligious and not racial. 
 
 IV. THE ARGUMENT OF FRINCIPLE. 
 
 We are opposed, gentlemen, to the Irish question being thrust into American 
 politics for the following reasons: 
 
 A. It raises a racial question. American citizenship is built not on foreign 
 nationality but by adoption of the principles of the Constitution of the United 
 States of America. The United States exists not for the foreignizing of 
 America, but Americanizing the foreigner who seeks to live in our land. What¬ 
 ever arouses racial feeling in America is dangerous to our national conscious¬ 
 ness. We are opposed to hyphenated Americanism. 
 
 B. It raises a religious question. This is foreign to the principles of 
 American national life. The propaganda of this element is such as to arouse 
 sectarian animosity, denominational bigotry, and injects religious controversy 
 into American politics. We are opposed to the religious hyphenate as well 
 as the racial, whether it be Jewish, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Christian 
 Science, or otherwise. The Irish question at home is a matter largely of re¬ 
 ligious association, and this is its tendency abroad. 
 
 In conclusion, sirs, we feel tht the Irish question should not have official 
 recognition at this time, when in the interests of the democracy of the world 
 there should be fostered a friendly feeling between the two great English- 
 speaking democracies of the United States of America and the British Empire. 
 
 We desire to thank you in behalf of those who think and feel as we do on 
 this question, not only of Irish birth,' but also as direct American citizens, as 
 ■well as an appreciation of ourselves personally for your courteous treatment 
 and patient hearing. With absolute confidence we leave the matter in your care. 
 
 David D. Irvine, 
 Henry Stewart, 
 
 • John Kennedy, 
 
 Lt. Lewis H. Shaw, 
 Albert E. Kelly, 
 William II. Chinny, 
 William Balfour. 
 
 (Tlie following documents, numbered from 1 to 25, are printed as 
 a part of the hearing by direction of the committee:) 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Statement of Rev. James Grattan Mythen, Assistant Minister Christ 
 
 Church, Norfolk, Va., as made to the Foreign Relations Committee 
 
 Saturday, August 30 , 1919 . 
 
 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, your committee has served 
 notice that only American citizens shall appear before you in relation to the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 905 
 
 matters which you are discussing, and it is, therefore, my privilege to appeal 
 to you primarily and, in fact, solely as an American citizen on the question 
 to which you have given a hearing to-day, namely, the freedom of the Irish 
 people in their motherland. 
 
 As you note, I am a clergyman of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and as a 
 follower of the Nazarene my training has taught me to be a pacifist. I 
 could in no other way in conscience follow the Prince of Peace, however, when 
 in holy week the President of the United States in an appeal made to the 
 American people through his address to the Houses of Congress assembled 
 in joint session, promulgated what to me seemed the most forceful Christian 
 utterance since the days of Apostolic inspiration, whatever difficulties had 
 previously been made manifest from the Christian ethical standpoint in 
 regard to war were swept away. As a man, as an American, then Mr. Wilson 
 cominced me as a Christian, it was my absolute and bounden duty to support 
 the great crusade of which he seemed to be the modern Peter the Hermit. 
 
 On Easter Day I-preached a sermon in favor of the war, and when the 
 young men of my parish enlisted I felt that I, being unattached, economically 
 responsible for no one, that it was unbecoming of me to be content merely to 
 stand in the pulpit and urge other men to give their lives for the principles 
 which I considered worthy of life giving. And so, with countless numbers 
 of young men of the Nation I enlisted voluntarily, although I was exempt from 
 the draft on account of my clerical profession, and also since I was beyond 
 the draft age. I was content to serve in the ranks in the humblest capacity, 
 feeling that the menial tasks which fell to my lot were noble because even 
 in their small way they were aiding in achieving the high purport of the 
 sacred mission to which our country had committed itself. 
 
 It was not at Belgium appealed to me so tremendously; I could sympathize 
 with Belgium because I am of Irish extraction; but it was the statements of 
 our President that the crusade which he had inaugurated meant enfranchise¬ 
 ment of the world; that all peoples everywhere were to determine for them¬ 
 selves the sovereignty under which they might desire to live. When he spe- 
 cifically told us that it was not against the German people, but against the im¬ 
 perial autocracy of Germany that we were to fight, I understood him as a clear, 
 logical and consequential thinker, and I knew that he did not mean alone the 
 new-born imperialism of Germany, but also the age-long imperialisms of which 
 no student of history could possibly be ignorant, especially the author of “The 
 New Freedom.” 
 
 From the textbooks of Mr. Wilson I- had learned much, and so I gladly fol¬ 
 lowed him in the war in which we were to exemplify by the force of militant 
 argument the principles which he had enunciated. 
 
 During my career in the Navy I was charged with helping along the work of 
 morale. I addressed countless numbers of enlisted men; I wish to tell you 
 that on one occasion I preached in St. Johns’ Church, Hampton, Va., to a 
 congregation composed almost entirely of men in uniform. I had to say in 
 defense of the President, because he was then being attacked, that he did mean 
 all that he had said, and that imperialism everywhere was to go. I distinctly 
 mentioned Ireland, India, and Egypt in my sermon. A member of the Presi¬ 
 dent’s wartime Cabinet was an auditor, and he sent for me—I mean Dr. Gar¬ 
 field, the Fuel Administrator—and he told me that I had echoed the thoughts 
 of the President. I was glad to hear him say that because in my sermon on 
 that day I had said that if the thing that I was preaching were not true, I 
 would gladly be taken out and put up against a wall and shot, because the 
 uniform I was wearing under my priestly vestments would be a disgrace to 
 the world. 
 
 Now, gentlemen of this committee, if a treaty of peace, so-called, is ratified 
 by you as the coordinate treaty-making power, and the so-called league of na¬ 
 tions receives your sanction, I shall feel, first of all, as an American citizen, 
 secondly as a minister of the gospel, and, thirdly, as an enlisted man in the 
 Navy, that I have been betrayed not only by the executive power who led us 
 to a victorious war and brought us to defeat in peace, hut also betrayed by 
 your honorable committee. 
 
 However, I do not fear such results. The principles enunciated in the four¬ 
 teen points are more than Mr. Wilson’s theories. He wrote them first in black 
 and white and we read them, but since that time they have been written in 
 red by my comrades, your sons, and your brothers in the fields of France, and 
 though Mr. Wilson may wish to erase the things he wrote, he can not eras® 
 
906 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 the indorsement of his principles which has been written in blood by the men 
 who fell in Flanders and France. 
 
 The Irish issue might well be called the acid test of our international hon¬ 
 esty. It is an acid which, if properly neutralized will work well for the com¬ 
 mon weal, but if left in sullen despair will, without doubt, ally itself with 
 every agency which makes for discontent and through which it may find a 
 voice. Is it the will of this honorable committee to throw the twenty millions 
 of our people into the already too large accumulation in the discard of discon¬ 
 tent? 
 
 It is not necessary for me to attempt to convince your honorable body that 
 there is no question of religion in the Irish situation as it is. The roster of 
 Irish Protestants who might well be called the Protestant saints of Catholic 
 Ireland answers that question for me; Grattan, Wolfe, Tono, Lord Edward 
 Fizgerald, John Mitchel—grandfather of the late Mayor of New York City— 
 Francis McKinley, hanged and quartered uncle of the late President of "the 
 United States; Robert Emmet, and Parneli. These Protestant leaders of 
 Catholic Ireland need no apologists. 
 
 There is a religious question, however, which is international in scope w T hen, 
 for instance, from the interior of India, mercenary Gurkhas are imported to 
 police Ireland. Those Gurkhas made themselves known in France when, strip¬ 
 ped to nothing but a gee-string, with oiled bodies, with a knife in either hand 
 and another in their mouths, disdaining the use of modern weapons, they 
 leaped like tigers at the foe. This, gentlemen, is England’s contribution from 
 India to Ireland. And from Ireland the equally mercenary Sir Michael 
 O’Dwyer, a man whom all Irishmen repudiate, was sent to rule over the 
 Punjab, and whose rule has been exemplified in these last few months by 
 suppressing particular demonstrations of unarmed Indians by the use of 
 machine guns and bombs from the airplanes, killing thereby in cold blood 
 hundreds of innocent men, women and children. 
 
 These are the ways of English imperialism which maufacture religious an¬ 
 imosities where none exist in reality. Thus, gentlemen, does England attempt 
 to keep her belligerent subjects from realizing the unity of purpose which they 
 should have in common in the destruction of her perfidious empire. She tries 
 to make the Irish hate the Indians and make the Indians hate the Irish. 
 So has she done in Ireland. She has created a fictitious animosity between 
 Protestant and Catholic which exists only as political propaganda. She 
 claims through Sir Edward Carson that the Protestant religion requires for its 
 preservation the maintenance of British rule in Ireland. As a Protestant, sir, 
 and a clergyman of the Protestant religion, I resent the implication that Protes¬ 
 tantism requires the sustenance of British imperialism to maintain itself in 
 Ireland or elsewhere. Were I convinced that this were a fact, that only 
 through the power of British arms could my religion maintain itself in 
 Ireland, then I would repudiate my religion at once. So, it is quite true 
 that in this country we have heard the British propaganda that there is a 
 religious difficulty in Ireland. 
 
 I want to say to you, sir, and gentlemen, that as a Protestant Irishman, 
 whose family to-day in Ireland are representatives of the Protestant religion, 
 that we would all gladly have Ireland free under any religious leadership rather 
 than remain, as we are, the only white race still in slavery. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 Statement by Former Congressman Joseph F. O’Connell, Representing a 
 Delegation of the Bench and Bar of Massachusetts Before the Senate 
 Committee on Foreign Relations. 
 
 August 30, 1919. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I have been authorized on behalf of the delegation of 25 
 lawyers sent here to-day by the bench and bar of Massachusetts to register our 
 protest against the ratification of the peace treaty now under consideration in 
 its present form, and to say to you that the proposed league of nations is in our 
 judgment un-American, illegal, and contrary to the ideals of the American 
 Republic. 
 
 It was my great honor and distinction to sit as a member of Congress for 
 four years ir the great Chamber at the other end of the Capitol, and every 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 907 
 
 time that I have viewed it in person or print my mind has traveled bach to 
 its beginning and history. 
 
 Sometimes, Senators, I am inclined to believe we forget the history of this 
 very building in which you will assemble in deliberation on this treaty. Can 
 you forget that in 1814 British troops marched from Annapolis on their errand 
 of destruction and captured Washington, at that time an unfortified city! I 
 will not detain you to narrate all the violations of so-called civilized warfare 
 that were committed by the British officers and troops in that campaign, but 
 I do make bold to recall to your attention the infamous conduct and unfor- 
 getable incident committed by the British troops in destroying the seat of 
 our Government, because it carries with it the evil omen of what it will do 
 again if it ever secures the chance. 
 
 The story of the expMt of Admiral Cockburn should be burned into the 
 memory of this committee and every member of the Senate. Let me refresh 
 your minds on a few of the details. After capturing the city, Cockburn 
 marched with his soldiers into the Capitol building and, assembling them in 
 the House Chamber, addressed them as follows, as we are told by English 
 and American historians: 
 
 “ We have met to-day in the building dedicated to the liberties of the Ameri¬ 
 can people—all in favor of burning this building to the ground, will say ‘ Aye 
 
 The vote was unanimous, and the orders were given “Burn it.” And the 
 original home of our Government, the emblem of our liberty and the original 
 house of our Government in this city was destroyed by the ruthless devastating 
 torch of the British soldier. 
 
 Let me warn you who are inclined to trust England that the same 
 spirit of contempt for the American Republic still persists in the same quarters 
 that inspired the orders to destroy our Capitol. If England ever secures the 
 power of dominating American ideals, such as is contemplated in the proposed 
 league of nations, is there any of you who can guarantee to the American 
 people that England would again not do the same, if not worse, than Cockburn 
 did in 1814? 
 
 This incident of American history is not recalled to you in any spirit of hatred 
 against England, but only from the prudence of my American citizenship that 
 can not still the fear that we will be taking a grave chance in entering into this 
 proposed entangling alliance with monarchical powers, and as a lawyer repre¬ 
 senting a group of practicing lawyers I counsel and advise against taking any 
 chances with our historical and traditional enemy. A small leak can lead 
 to the destruction of the mightiest dam and your care should be to prevent 
 anything that might lead to a leak of American and republican principles., 
 for if the dam that has been built to protect the American people and the 
 principles of liberty ever gives way the best minds of the world must agree 
 that no man can foretell the awful destruction that will follow. 
 
 The President may cling to his ideals, but as an American lawyer and on 
 behalf of this delegation of lawyers from New England we deliberately assert 
 that the President has no right to entertain in his official capacity ideals that 
 interfere or modify or control in the slightest degree the accepted and estab¬ 
 lished ideals of American liberty as laid down in our Declaration of Inde¬ 
 pendence and National Constitution. We in this delegation represent the tradi¬ 
 tions and teachings of James Otis, Samuel and John Adams, and Daniel Webster, 
 and we fervidly and earnestly appeal to you, most of whom are lawyers, in 
 their name not to forget the basic reasons that brought about the establishment 
 of the United States of America as a Republic separate and distinct from ail 
 other races and governments. 
 
 We urge that if the principles of a republican form of government were suffi¬ 
 cient to justify the establishment of the American Republic in 1776 they are 
 just as sound in 1919 to justify the establishment of an Irish republic in Ire¬ 
 land. This Republic was established on the doctrine of majority rule and all 
 authorities agree that over 80 per cent of the Irish people have followed the 
 course of the American Republic and have established for themselves an 
 Irish republic, and hence we respectfully urge, that, having expressed to the 
 Irish people the sympathy of the American people on the efforts of the Irish 
 people to secure independence by a vote of 60 to 1, the consistent and proper 
 thing to do now is to officially recognize Ireland as a republic. You have heard 
 to-day from the lips of eminent Americans who have been in Ireland enough to 
 justify you in acting immediately and stating to the world that you are satis¬ 
 fied that the Irish people have legally established themselves as a republic. 
 
908 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 So much has been called to your attention to-day on this very important 
 matter that I will not tire you by recurring to any of the various points dwelt 
 upon by those who have already addressed you. But it does seem pertinent 
 to lead your thoughts to that old bogey and masterpiece of British propaganda, 
 the Ulster question, and, at the risk of taxing your patience, I ask your in¬ 
 dulgence to read an authoritative statement from Ernest A. Boyd, one of the 
 leading Protestant Irishmen of these days and an official of the British consular 
 service: Ulster is a purely geographical term which describes the northern 
 Province of Ireland containing the nine counties of Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, 
 Tyrone, Armagh, Fermanagh, Down, Antrim, and Derry. 
 
 This region is intimately and gloriously associated with the greatest tradi¬ 
 tions, literary and historical, of the Irish nation from the earliest time, when 
 it was the scene of the epic masterpiece of Celtic literature, down to the eve 
 of the union, when Wolfe Tone conceived his dream of the United Irishmen in 
 Belfast, and Grattan founded at Dunegannon the volunteers of prophetic sig¬ 
 nificance. Evidently this Irish Ulster is not the “ Ulster ” which has called 
 forth the rebellious enthusiasm of Sir Edward Carson and his English friends. 
 The one is a national, the other a political phenomenon; yet, strange to say, 
 owing to the absence of inverted commas, it is on behalf of the political 
 “Ulster” that a plea for self-determination is often raised by those who argue 
 that she can not deny to Ulster the right which she claims for herself. In 
 other words, the demand of the Irish people for.self-government presents itself 
 as indistinguishable from the claim of “ Ulster ” to revolt against the laws of 
 national and political unity. If the principle of national be the test to the 
 right of self-determination, then it is important to distinguish between Ulster 
 and “ Ulster.” The history of the Plantation of Ulster need not be recapitu¬ 
 lated to-day. The facts are historical, and, whatever else may be said of them, 
 they are hardly the best foundation to a claim to special consideration at the 
 expense of the native population of the country upon which the settlers were 
 thrust. 
 
 The present obstacles in the way of any acceptance of the theory that Ulster 
 is a homogeneous entity are sufficient to dispense with a return to ancient 
 history in the manner of which we Irish are accused of being over fond. In 
 H911 the total population of our northern Province was 1,581,096, of which 
 G90.S16 were Catholic Nationalists. Politically, this division was emphasized 
 by the return of 17 Nationalists as against 16 Unionist members of Parliament. 
 Even since the last election, when a redistribution of seats and the split of the 
 Nationlist vote between Nationalists and Sinn Feiners affected these figures to 
 the advantage of the Unionist, there is still a majority in Ulster united with 
 the majority elsewhere in Ireland so far as the demand for an Irish Parliament 
 is concerned. Ulster is neither Unionist nor Protestant. Three counties, Done¬ 
 gal, Canan, and Monoghan, are almost wholly Catholic. Catholics and Protest¬ 
 ants are about equally divided in Armagh, Tyrone, and Fermanagh; and it is 
 only in the three counties of Down, Antrim, and Derry that there is a strong 
 Protestant Unionist majority. Even there Belfast has returned one Nationalist 
 member representing the Home ltule Catholic minority. If the four counties 
 known as Northeast Ulster are grouped together for electoral purposes, it is 
 found that 5 Nationalists are elected as against 14 Unionists. The remaining 
 five counties returned 12 Nationalists and only 2 Unionists. Clearly, it is im¬ 
 possible to consider Ulster as a political and religious unity. If the right of 
 Ireland to self-determination be granted, not only will a minority of the whole 
 country be coerced, but a minority in Ulster itself. 
 
 To do Ulster justice, those interested have rarely dared to base their demand 
 for separate treatment on the ground of a majority right to self-determination. 
 Carsonia is frankly antidemocratic and particularist, demanding specal conces¬ 
 sions for a majority on the sole ground of local advantage, and without any 
 thought for the rights of the majority in Ulster or for the remaining Provinces of 
 Ireland. It is alleged that Ulster has prospered since the union, that it is pas¬ 
 sionately devoted to England—not the Empire, for colonial home rule is abhor¬ 
 rent—that its interests are opposed to those of the rest of Ireland, and that 
 these would suffer at the hands of a legislature representing an agricultural 
 community and dominated by Catholicism. The very arguments cited in favor 
 of Ulster are a proof of the particularism and purely local selfishness of their 
 champions. So far as the prosperity of Ulster is concerned it is limited to a 
 few industries in a restricted area. 
 
 The Province shows the second highest total of emigration for all Ireland 
 between 1S51 and 1911—namely, 1,236,872—and between 1841 and 1911 the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 909 
 
 population of Ulster had declined by 805,177 persons. Three Ulster counties 
 are on the list of Irish counties with the greatest number of emigrants, and two of 
 them are in the superprosperous, supercontented “ northeast corner ”—namely, 
 Antrim, with 297,605, and Down, with 162,571. And as showing that this de¬ 
 cline of man power is not a heritage of papal superstition, these figures are 
 higher than those of the third county, Tyrone, whose emigrants over the same 
 period numbered 149,243. 
 
 As for the pretense that a poverty stricken agricultural population would 
 victimize the “ prosperous ” industrial minority, it is worth noting that the tax¬ 
 able revenue per head is lower in Ulster than in Leinster, being £3 9s. 8d. in the 
 former, £4 8s. 9d. in the latter, and that congested districts, with all the mis¬ 
 ery the words can note, are found in Ulster no less than in Connaught. On per 
 capita valuation the highest northern country ranks only twelfth in Ireland. In 
 fact, what Ulster fears even more than it fears democratic government is demo¬ 
 cratic taxation. Its claim to self-determination is a claim for capitalist determi¬ 
 nation alike for Ireland and Ulster. 
 
 Every Irishman knows how profound is the indifference of Ulster to Eng¬ 
 lish interests or English sentiment whenever these threatened to clash with the 
 interests of Carsonism. The professions of undying affection for England no 
 more corresponds to individual sentiment than do the boastings of economic 
 independence to individual interests. Should northeast Ulster become Carson- 
 shire under separate English administration, nobody would be more seriously 
 disturbed than the Ulster bankers and the thousand and one business men who 
 do not own the few favored industries independent of Irish support. ' In other 
 words, these purely selfish manifestations of loyalty to England and inde¬ 
 pendence of Ireland made possible only by exploiting popular religious bigotry 
 do not represent real political and social conditions. They are as remote from 
 the facts of Ulster’s life as are the panic fears of Catholicism which haunt the 
 imagination of the Protestants where they are a dominating majority, but are 
 proved groundless by their absence in the scattered Protestant minorities out¬ 
 side of northeast Ulster. 
 
 “ Ulster ” is not, as has been shown, a geographical entity; it is certainly not 
 a national organism; it is not even homogeneous in religion and politics. It is 
 an integral part of the Province whose name it usurps, and its separatism flour¬ 
 ishes solely because a small portion of the community, led by strangers, has 
 not been exposed to the process of incorporation into the national and economic 
 being, such as has everywhere resulted in political unity. We do not anticipate 
 civil war, which has in most cases preceded the welding together of similarly 
 divided communities, for we hold that the work of absorption will be painlessly 
 effected by economic pressure. At the worst, a trial of strength in war, as be¬ 
 tween the Federal and Confederate States of North America, would lead to the 
 definite establishment of a dominant majority. It is immaterial which side 
 should win, provided one were irrevocably defeated. The consequences of an 
 Irish civil war could not mean one-quarter of the misery, waste, and disruption 
 which a continuance of this unsettled problem has brought upon Ireland. 
 Fortunately, however, there are not even two parties of extremists who believe 
 in the probability *of civil war, and one set of extremists in a nation of essen¬ 
 tially moderate and well-disposed people will have some difficulty in making 
 Ireland follow the example of other countries faced with the same problem. 
 
 Irishmen plead that as the word “ Ulster ” is misused in this connection, so 
 is the word “ coercion.” The coercion in question is the same as that to which 
 all minorities have submitted. It does not stand for the forcible oppression of 
 an independent people by an alien government, for, whatever their political 
 origin, Ulstermen are self-confessedly and aggressively Irish. They are asked 
 to rid themselves of their hallucinations fostered by those who exploit them 
 brazenly. It. is a peculiar fact that the people of “ Ulster ” have never yet 
 been allowed to speak for themselves. The Catholic peasantry became articu¬ 
 late in the person of Michael Davitt, the Catholic worker in .Tames Connolly, 
 both notable spokesmen of the ideals of democracy, it is interesting to state. 
 Orangeism relies upon lawyers and capitalists for the expression of its views, 
 and these representatives have a consistent record of opposition to every pro¬ 
 gressive measure passed by the House of Commons and to every progressive 
 idea which has captured the Irish peoeple. To witness the savage carnivals, 
 the “ annual brain storm,” as it has been termed, in which “ Ulster” renews its 
 barbarous hatred-of the phantoms which blind the people to real issues, is to 
 understand the imperative necessity of liberating the victims, They can b« 
 
910 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 freed not by special recognition of tlieir primitive tribalism, but by sharing 
 tbe common duties and privileges of Irish self-government. 
 
 Senators, if there be a free Ireland, there will be a free “ Ulster.” 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 Statement by James E. Deery, Indianapolis, National President of the 
 
 Ancient Order of Hibernians in America. 
 
 To the Foreign Relations Committee, United States Senate : 
 
 The Ancient Order of Hibernians, at their recent national convention held in 
 San Francisco, Calif., last month, adopted a resolution insisting that in the 
 event that a league of nations covenant was adopted that provision be made 
 therein for the recognition of Ireland as a member thereof. The Hibernians 
 feel that every nation in the world, and particularly America, was inspired to 
 victory in the recent war by the thought that when the terms of peace were 
 drawn up the world would be made safe for democracy and that all small 
 nations would be given the right to determine the form of government under 
 which they desired to live. The Hibernians are interested in this' question now 
 before the Senate committee solely as American citizens and lovers of liberty. 
 The Hibernians are proud of the record for 100 per cent Americanism made by 
 the Irish in this country from the days of the revolution to the present time. 
 
 When America was looking for outside help, prior to the War of the Revolu¬ 
 tion, they sent Benjamin Franklin to Europe, and in no country did he receive 
 more encouragement and support in behalf of the America cause than from Ire¬ 
 land. They not only held meetings throughout Ireland but they raised funds 
 with which to help finance the colonies. 
 
 Recently the President of the United States, in asking the United States 
 Senate to ratify a treaty with France regarding her boundaries, urged that we 
 were but repaying our debt of the revolution. History records the fact that the 
 first troops in France to petition permission to come to the assistance of America 
 in the days of the revolution were the members of the Irish Brigade, a part of 
 the French Army, and the first French troops to land on our shores were 2,300 
 Irishmen under Count Dillion. Likewise, exiles from Ireland found their way 
 to America and fought throughout the war in the continental forces. It is esti¬ 
 mated that 50 per cent of Washington’s Army was made up of Irishmen. In an 
 investigation made by the English Parliament at the time of the revolution it 
 was shown that in some parts of the American Army the Gaelic language was 
 spoken more than the English. So that if we have any debts to pay for assist¬ 
 ance rendered us in the war of the revolution Ireland’s claim should come first. 
 
 As the league of nations now stands we feel that article 10 prevents America 
 repaying her debt to Ireland. The Hibernians sincerely trust that before the 
 terms of peace are ratified by the United States Senate that the Senate will 
 officially recognize the republic of Ireland as a free and independent nation. 
 
 No. 
 
 Statement of Rev. F. X. McCabe, C. M., LL. D., President Depattl 
 
 University, Chicago, III. 
 
 I would like to present before your honorable body this short statement. 
 The war was fought, according to the pledges made to the people of this 
 country by the President of the United States, to put an end to all autocratic 
 forms of government, and thus make the world safe for democracy; to 
 liberate the nations held in bondage by stronger powers and give them the 
 opportunity of selecting their own form of government. On the strength of 
 these pledges American men fought and died, and their sacrifices and valor 
 won the war. The time for making good the pledges has come. As American 
 citizens we have done our part and more than our part. We have a right 
 to demand that the pledges made be kept and can not tolerate post-armistice 
 interpretations made by the Chief Executive for the purpose of evading the 
 fulfillment of those pledges. We can not as American citizens tolerate a 
 league of nations that impairs the sovereignty of these United States. We 
 believe that your committee will stand firm and save our country from the 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 911 
 
 catastrophe of being made the cats-paw in European politics. We feel that 
 you can see that both the treaty and the league of nations make the two 
 greatest empires of the world stronger than ever, and place our country 
 between them to be crushed by their combined force any time they see it to 
 their interest. The giving of Shantung to Japan and the' refusal to recognize 
 the rights of the people of Ireland are crimes against the democratic ideals of 
 our country, branding us before the world as absolutely faithless to the men 
 that died, to the men that fought, to the American people and to the 
 oppressed nations of the world. In the name of justice and decency repudiate 
 the league of nations and demand the fulfillment of America’s word of honor. 
 
 No. 5. 
 
 Statement of Mrs. Mary F. McWhorter, National. President Ladies' 
 Auxiliary, Ancient Order of Hibernians in America. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen : When the President of the United States 
 issued the call to American manhood to go to the battle fields of Europe to 
 vindicate American ideals of democracy none answered the call more readily 
 than did American boys of Irish blood. 
 
 During the time our country was engaged in winning the war the women of 
 the organization which I reiwesent rendered splendid service to the Nation in 
 every line of war work. In order that the service rendered along this line 
 might be of the very best, it was my duty to visit 33 States of the Union during 
 that time. During these visits I addressed gatherings of the members of this 
 organization in from two to eight towns in each one of those States. In this 
 way I had the privilege of meeting many of the mothers of the American boys 
 of Irish blood who were fighting in the trenches in Flanders. The sacrifices 
 made by these mothers would wring tears from the eyes of the most hard¬ 
 hearted. Many of them are widows who had worked hard to give their boys 
 the necessary education to tilll good positions. A soldier’s pay w T as a very poor 
 substitute for the salary these boys were earning. I know well that in many 
 cases these widowed mothers had to go to work again in order to keep the 
 little home intact. They never uttered a complaint, because they felt that their 
 boys -were given to a holy cause—that of freeing the enslaved peoples of the 
 whole world, among which they surely thought were included the people of the 
 land of their origin, Ireland. And so, as I have already said, they bore all 
 their privations cheerfully and uncomplainingly, and, besides earning their 
 r ily bread by the sweat of their brow, they also gave splendid service to Red 
 Cross and other war-service societies. 
 
 During the war, while every member of my organization was actively en¬ 
 gaged in war work, you may know very little was accomplished in the way 
 of recruiting new members, hence since the signing of the armistice a period 
 of reconstruction has set in. This, too, has kept me constantly traveling from 
 one State to the other. I find a great change in the spirit of our members, in 
 which keen disappointment is the dominant note. The glowing words of our 
 great President uttered on our entrance into the World War have no longer 
 the power to inspire and uplift, for the people have lost all faith in them. I 
 find this feeling of discontent not only among the American people of Irish 
 blood, but among other Americans as well. The press of America, with but 
 few exceptions, make it appear that the great mass of the American people 
 favor the league of nations. Gentlemen of the committee, there is a growing 
 spirit of opposition to this proposed league that it would be well for those who 
 sincerely and honestly love America and who wish to safeguard America’s real 
 interests to heed. If is my honest opinion that if every American was made 
 familiar with what this league really means to America there would arise 
 such a storm of protest against it that it would be heard around the world. 
 Liberty loving Americans who have a just pride in our great Nation will never 
 stand to have this Republic made the tail of the British kite. 
 
 Speaking for the people of Ireland who have aroused the admiration of all 
 liberty-loving people the world over by their brave fight for their national 
 rights, I have this to say: 
 
 The contemplation of what these people are suffering to-day is the cause of 
 great agony of mind to those of their blood on this side of the Atlantic. The 
 sanctity of the Irish home is violated night after night. I ask you, gentlemen 
 of the committee, to picture the condition of the minds of the mothers in Ire- 
 
912 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 land—they never know from one night to another when their homes are to be 
 invaded and the children of their affection dragged out and thrown into prison. 
 Have pity on these mothers and refrain from an act that will continue this 
 suffering indefinitely, for the Irish will never give up their fight for freedom 
 while a remnant of the race remains. 
 
 The Irish republic was established according to the expressed sentiments of 
 our. great President “ the right of self-determination for all peoples ” echoed 
 around the world at the time this now famous slogan was uttered—it even found 
 its way into Ireland despite the wall of silence England had built around that 
 unhappy island. The young men of Ireland were inspired with a new courage 
 and when they had an opportunity last December at the general election they 
 “ self-determined ” for an Irish republic, feeling sure they were carrying out 
 the wishes of the President of the United States. They still have faith in our 
 President despite unfavorable appearances. 
 
 Eamonn DeValera, the President of the Irish republic, is in our midst to 
 make an appeal to the American peolpe. He has already won millions of 
 Americans to his cause. He is a young man who has made untold sacrifices 
 for the ideals which he represents. Life would be very easy and comfortable 
 did he but chose to abandon those ideals, but he has taken up the harder but 
 the nobler cause while his young wife and his six small children languish in 
 Ireland and sigh for the absent husband and father. Eamonn DeValera is 
 typical of the young men of Ireland to-day—surely to the minds of all liberty- 
 loving Americans their cause is a just cause, and surely this is the time for 
 America to pay her long-standing debt of gratitude to Ireland. The millions 
 of Americans of Irish biood expect this debt to be paid and they have a right 
 to expect it. 
 
 No. 6. 
 
 Statement submitted by District Attorney Joseph C. Pelletier, of Boston, 
 supreme advocate of the Knights of Columbus, and speaking in behalf of the 
 bench and bar committee of the Irish Victory Fund: 
 
 After hearing the wonderful presentation of the case against the proposed 
 league of nations set forth in such logical, powerful, and truly American spirit, 
 I feel the thrill of the schoolboy after first learing the story of Washington 
 and the patriot fathers who won our independence and made possible this great 
 Republic. 
 
 Every man of Irish blood or descent, every man from the country of op¬ 
 pressed peoples felt that,the 14 points laid down by President Wilson justified 
 the last sacrifice and the greatest conceivable loss. We entered the World War 
 for humanity, for democracy, that men everywhere might be lifted from op¬ 
 pression and restored to their God-given right of self-determination. Which of 
 all the subject peoples of the world so nearly fell within the limitations pre¬ 
 scribed by our President, which of them all so clearly appealed to the American 
 heart and head and hand as the republic of Ireland? 
 
 Always a nation, ever protesting foreign oppression, more recently adopting 
 a free government by public vote, to-day as ever held in subjection by the armed 
 forces of the dominant aggressor of 700 years, Ireland claims her right to rec¬ 
 ognition, her right to the fruits of this great world conflict, and the American 
 people will not deny her rights. The league of nations as presented ignores 
 the declaration of President Wilson, ignores the right of the subject people of 
 Ireland, ignores the government of the republic of Ireland lawfully set up— 
 to adopt it as written is to* deny the principles upon which we entered the war 
 and to say to subject peoples, unless the Big Four say so you shall not be recog¬ 
 nized, you must invoke bloodshed and war to assert your rights, and we will 
 use our joint united forces to keep you down. 
 
 Gentlemen, let there be no league based on fraud, on the rule of might! Un¬ 
 less the republic of Ireland is openly acknowledged, let us refuse to join in a 
 conspiracy to cheat the downtrodden of the world! Let us insist that the 14 
 points be accepted as declared, not subject to hidden treaties and agreements 
 making them null and void. 
 
 No. 7. 
 
 Statement of Hon. Joseph P. Mahoney, Chicago, III., Former State Senator. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, a time has again arrived when the Senate of the United 
 States must exercise the power imposed on it by the Constitution for the 
 preservation of this great Nation. As president of the United Societies of 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 913 
 
 Chicago, I am commissioned to attend the meeting of your committee to-day 
 to inform your honorable body of the views of some 750,000 people of Irish 
 blood who reside in Chicago upon the question of adopting or approving the 
 league of nations pending before your committee. As American citizens we 
 stand unalterably opposed to this measure, and we most earnestly call upon 
 your committee to report it back to the Senate with the recommendation that 
 the Senate refuse to concur in and approve of it. We believe that the country 
 has greater cause to-day in view of the intrigues, secret treaties, and decep¬ 
 tion on the part of the great nations who propose to be the signatories with 
 us to this proposed league of nations, to refrain from entering into any en¬ 
 tangling alliance with European nations than we did at the date of the 
 warning in Washington’s Farewell Address. For more than a hundred years 
 we have prospered in attending to our own affairs; let us stick to the old 
 plan. Gentlemen, in the name of freedom, let us return once more to that 
 honorable and independent position among the nations under which we have, 
 made such remarkable progress, that to-day we are the foremost Nation of 
 the world. Let us stand firmly for the struggling young republics growing 
 out of the recent war, and extend to them our early recognition and support. 
 This is the wish of the people of Irish birth or descent in the United States 
 and of all Americans who love their land. 
 
 No. 8. 
 
 Statement of Judge O’Neill Ryan, of St. Louis. 
 
 Senators : As I understand, you desire to hear our views on the league of 
 nations in so far as we represent public sentiment in our respective communi¬ 
 ties, and also what is our special viewpoint as to the effect of the league on 
 Ireland’s right which she has determined to a republican form of government. 
 Together with my colleagues from St. Louis, I represent many thousands of 
 Americans of Irish birth or descent in various organizations; also we believe 
 we speak the sentiments of many more thousands of the race who are not in 
 any organized bodies, but who are profoundly interested in this question and 
 who believe that Ireland should be recognized by this Government as a re¬ 
 public. We may safely say that all. for whom we speak are confident that if 
 this league is adopted in its present form and this Government becomes signa¬ 
 tory, Ireland will continue as she has been for centuries, a subject country, 
 and under a power that has never hesitated to drain her life’s blood physically 
 and economically. Personally, I am absolutely opposed to my country becom¬ 
 ing a signatory to this league no matter what amendments or reservations 
 thereto may be made. I believe in its essence it strikes at and is antagonistic 
 to the Constitution of our country and the fundamental principles of human 
 liberty upon which that Constitution is rested. We have guaranteed by our 
 Federal Constitution a republican form of government to every State of the 
 Union. By this instrument we would undertake to guarantee the perpetuation 
 of forms of government which are hostile to our own both in their principles 
 and in their practices. That the United States should undertake to guarantee 
 with its blood and treasure the perpetuation of monarchies and empires should 
 be unthinkable to any sound American mind. I believe this sentiment against 
 any league of nations so far as our country is concerned is rapidly growing, 
 and that the great debates which have been going on in the Senate chamber 
 are informing and convincing the American people who have hitherto been 
 kept in ignorance of the facts and have been deluded by the specious pretext 
 that the league meant peace. 
 
 So far as its immediate effect upon Ireland is concerned, I recall the ques¬ 
 tion of just this morning, that Senator Brandagee addressed to Mr. Walsh, in¬ 
 quiring if he had read the address of Senator Walsh and what he believed as to 
 his argument that this league would protect Ireland. Mr. Walsh answered he 
 had not read the speech. I read every word of it, as I have read perhaps every 
 word of all the addresses upon this subject in the Senate, as they have appeared 
 in the Congressional Record. The answer is that the argument of Senator 
 Walsh is absolutely fallacious. By article 10 we undertake in substance to re¬ 
 spect and guarantee the territorial integrity and political independence of the 
 signatory powers, guaranteeing that territorial integrity against external ag- 
 
914 
 
 TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 gression. No one but knows that Ireland unaided can not throw off by force 
 the yoke of British tyranny. But in one of two ways can the Irish republic be¬ 
 come de jure facto as it is now de facto. One is by its recognition by the United 
 States and the eifect of that being to compel its recognition by England, and the 
 other is by revolution aided by outside power. Ireland to-day is an- armed 
 camp. It is under a military despotism like unto that to which Belgium was 
 subjected by Germany, and Egypt is now subjected by England, and Korea by 
 Japan. If this league were joined in by this Nation, and Ireland sought to 
 overthrow that power which now dominates her by military force and there 
 was interference on her behalf by any other country so that the words “ ex¬ 
 ternal aggression ” came into effect, if England needed or asked our aid it 
 would become our duty at once to give to her our military power to destroy 
 Ireland’s efforts at freedom. In other words, it is absolutely impossible for Ire¬ 
 land unaided to successfully revolt against English power. We would guarantee 
 by this covenant that no foreign power could interfere on her behalf without 
 knowing that this Nation would with her money and men take England’s side 
 of the conflict. That is the plain reading of the covenant. 
 
 However my own feeling, and as I said before, I believe the feeling is grow¬ 
 ing enormously, is that in no circumstances and with no reservations or amend¬ 
 ments, should we become signatory to the league. Not even if Ireland were in¬ 
 dependent, if she were a republic, and her territorial integrity and form of 
 government guaranteed by this Nation, would it still be either just or wise 
 for this Nation to become party thereto. That I say, in view of what we know 
 to be the gross injustices and flagrant violation of the rights of subject peoples 
 that have been perpetrated by at least two of the great signatory powers 
 and that we would guarantee if we became party, and we know not what other 
 secret arrangements have been made by which other peoples are plundered and 
 their countries divided like the vultures plucked at the vitals of Prometheus, 
 Ireland would not want her liberty at the expense of the liberties of other peo¬ 
 ples. The Senate alone stands between the people of this country and the Con¬ 
 stitution of our Government, and those who would destroy the people and vio¬ 
 late the Constitution. Many of you gentlemen have made a magnificent fight 
 against this league, and once again it becomes manifest that the people of this 
 country must turn to the Republicans to save it from desecration and’division. 
 
 No. 9. 
 
 Statement oe Daniel T. O’Connell, Director of the Irish National Bureau, 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 The wave of spontaneous support of the cause of Ireland that has swept 
 America and finds voice at this hearing is convincing proof that the people 
 of the United States demand that Ireland be free. 
 
 The teachings of Washington, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John and Samuel 
 Adams, John Hancock, James Otis, and the patriots who founded the United 
 States have not been forgotten. America is aroused in defense of the liberties 
 the Revolutionary patriots won for the colonists, their descendants, and the 
 millions of emigrants and their descendants who found under the Stars and 
 Stripes protection from oppression and all the privileges of human liberties. 
 
 The league of nations treaty now before the Senate must be rejected. 
 It is the product of British scheming. If ratified it will destroy our most 
 cherished traditions, and Ireland will be more fettered by British chains than 
 ever before. 
 
 No. 10. 
 
 Resolutions of Irish National Assembly, Expressing Thanks to United 
 
 States Senate. 
 
 Dr. Patrick McCartan, envoy of the republic of Ireland in the United States, 
 August 25, 1919, handed to Vice President Marshall, as President of the Senate, 
 a parchment communication from the Dail Eirann (Irish national assembly) 
 expressing the thanks of the elected representatives of the Irish people for the 
 recent action of the Senate in requesting the American commission to the peace 
 
TREATY OE PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 915 
 
 confidence to secure for President Eamon de Yalera and ills colleagues on the 
 Irish republic’s peace commission a hearing before the peace conference at 
 Paris; and for the expression of the Senate's sympathy with Hie aspirations of 
 the Irish people to govern themselves. The following is the text of the com¬ 
 munication in full: 
 
 To the President of the Senate of the United States, 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 Sir: We have the honor to inform you that the subjoined resolution was 
 unanimously adopted by the Dail Eriann in session assembled in the Mansion 
 House, Dublin, on 17th June, 1919. 
 
 Accept, sir, the assurance of our high esteem. 
 
 Arthur . Griffith, Acting President . 
 
 Sean O’Celleagh, Speaker. 
 
 “ The duly elected representatives of Ireland assembled in legislative session 
 in Dublin, this 17th day of June, 1919, before taking up the business of the 
 day, desire to record their appreciation of the action of the Congress of the 
 United States in behalf of Ireland, and in particular of the following resolutions 
 adopted by the Senate of the United States: 
 
 “ ‘ That the Senate of the United States earnestly requests the American 
 peace commission at Versailles to endeavor to secure for Eamonn de Valera, 
 Arthur Griffith, and George Noble Count Plunkett a hearing before the peace 
 conference in order that they may present the case to Ireland. 
 
 “ ‘And, further, the Senate of the United States expresses its sympathy with 
 the aspirations of the Irish people for a government of their own choice.’ 
 
 “ It is therefore resolved, That the elected government of Ireland be, and is 
 hereby directed to convey the thanks of the Irish nation to the Congress of the 
 United States, to declare that the people of Ireland cherish no designs upon 
 the rights of territories of other nations, but ardently seek to live in cordial 
 peace with, and as one of, the free nations of the world; and to assure the 
 people of America that the ties of blood and friendship which subsisted between 
 both nations in the days of their subjection to one common oppressor have en¬ 
 dured and are indissoluble.” 
 
 No. 11. 
 
 Statement of Hon. Eugene F. Kinkead, Former Member of Congress and 
 
 Former Major, United States Army. 
 
 I appeal to the Senate not to accept any covenant which would prevent this 
 Nation from following its time-honored traditions in giving aid to peoples 
 striving for independence. The covenant, as framed, would keep Ireland, 
 Egypt, India, Korea, and colonies in South Africa in bondage. To accept it 
 would defeat the purpose for which we ^entered the World War and align us 
 on the side of autocracy and against the right of peoples to determine for 
 themselves the character of government under which they shall live. This 
 right we concede to Germany. Shall we deny it to Ireland? We can only judge 
 the future by the past, and our knowledge of the Government of Great Britain, 
 as distinguished from its great people, should convince all fair-minded Amer¬ 
 icans that the adoption of article 10 of the covenant will rivet anew the chains 
 on Ireland. Seventy-five years ago President John Tyler declared that he was 
 no half-way man regarding Irish independence. To-day 75,000,000 Americans 
 demand that the covenant that shall form the basis of any league of nations 
 shall embody the same principle. 
 
 No 12. 
 
 Statement of Katherine Hughes, Secretary Irish National Bureau. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee: In 1916 hero hearts in 
 Ireland again rose in armed rebellion and proclaimed, “ In the name of God and 
 of the dead generations from which she receives her old traditions of nation¬ 
 hood,” that Ireland had a God-given right to freedom. 
 
 135549°—19-11 
 
916 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 They fell—Ireland’s latest of hero rebels—but in the travail of 1916 the Re¬ 
 public of Ireland was born. This Republic lives to-day, as truly a Republic as 
 that of America in 1778, when its Congress, through its envoy, Franklin, pledged 
 itself to aid in the liberation of Ireland if her oppression by England continued. 
 
 This Republic of Ireland has to-day the recognition of but one State—that of 
 Russia—as the American Republic in its infancy had only the recognition of 
 France. The man who presides over the Congress of Ireland to-day was elected 
 to that position by the unanimous vote of all the representatives of the Irish 
 Congress, elected in their turn by the combined ballots of 75 per cent of the 
 Irish Nation. 
 
 There is not in the world to-day a government more essentially “ of the peo¬ 
 ple, by the people, and for the people” than that of the Irish Republic, yet if 
 America ratifies the peace treaty with its component league of nations, guaran¬ 
 teeing the integrity of the British Empire as it exists in international day, 
 America would be guilty of aiding to suppress this government of the Irish 
 people; it would be throttling Ireland’s heroic expression of self-determination 
 made by ballot last December in the face of an English army of occupation; 
 it would be reforging England’s chains on Ireland by increasing the “ right of 
 might ” which alone keeps her bound to-day. 
 
 On the other hand, if America rejects this league of nations and its sections 
 buttressing British imperialism, America will be free to give official recognition 
 to the government of the Irish republic and so make Ireland to-day in the eyes 
 of the whole world an independent nation. This a free America can do without 
 a drop of bloodshed and with only a passing protest from England, so lately 
 America’s associate in a war for democracy. 
 
 If, however, America ratifies this treaty and component league, she will not 
 be free to act as liberator of this gallant little country, which is the motherland 
 of 20,000,000 in America—not free to be liberator of Ireland, which was first 
 to come to the aid of America in her struggle for liberty—not free to be liberator 
 of Ireland, whose president even now is America’s gift to Ireland, for Eamonn 
 de Valera was born under the folds of Old Glory. 
 
 This invaluable gift was renewed by America in 1916, when nothing but his 
 American birth stood between Eamonn de Valera and the rifles of the execu¬ 
 tioners, who had taken the lives of his comrades in arms. 
 
 America has lately been associated in a great world war and has exchanged 
 views with many other States, but I can not believe that America has sacrificed 
 or will sacrifice one iota of its historic principles of liberty and the rights of 
 national freedom, which make America to-day the hope of oppressed peoples 
 everywhere. 
 
 America is true to the America of the past, and America will, I firmly believe, 
 soon give Eamonn de Valera to Ireland a third time—not as a child of destiny 
 nor as an imprisoned rebel, but as a victorious president. On that day America 
 will not only give Ireland her president. She will also give to Ireland the 
 priceless gift of freedom. She will reestablish Ireland in the eyes of the world 
 as a sovereign nation. 
 
 No. 13. 
 
 Statement of Ida. Patrick J. Lynch, of Indianapolis, Ind., Clerk of the 
 
 Supreme and Appellate Courts of Indiana. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, citizens of Irish blood are 
 appearing before your committee in the earnest hope that out of the great 
 world conflict recently ended there may come, as a part of the fruits of 
 victory, a fulfillment of the great principle of self-determination for all na¬ 
 tions, weak and small, as laid down by President Wilson. 
 
 Throughout all the annals of civilization there is no parallel of the stead¬ 
 fast and continuous courage shown by the Irish people for more than 700 
 years, cherishing without intermission the hope and national aspiration of 
 that freedom for which they have so often fought. Racially the Irish are 
 a separate people; theirs is a national spirit; their country is their own, and 
 has been wrested from them only by the power of might, not upon the great 
 God-given principle of right. 
 
 At this time when the hopes and aspirations of all peoples, the world over, 
 especially those long oppressed, is to gain their national freedom, and in the 
 light of the charter enunciated by the President of the United States of the 
 
TREATY OF FEACE WITH .GERMANY, 
 
 917 
 
 right of all nations, great and small alike, to live under that form of govern¬ 
 ment which they themselves want, and such hopes are being realized by 
 younger nations, surely Ireland may, in truth and justice, ask that the 
 centuries-long struggle in this dawn of the new era of making the world safe 
 for democracy be ended forever. 
 
 No. 14. 
 
 Joint Statement of Rev. Joiin J. Moran, of Youngstown, Ohio, and 
 
 Charles P. Mooney, of Cleveland, Ohio, Reporting in Behalf of the 
 
 State Convention of the Ancient Order of Hibernians of Ohio. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Foreign Relations Committee: 
 
 Ireland has, by its recent vote at the last parliamentary election held in 
 that country, given expression to its demand for complete independence and 
 voiced its opposition to a union with Great Britain by a vote of 1,516,770 in 
 favor of an Irish republic as against 308,713 votes in favor of the union. 
 
 As the men who advocated complete separation had been leaders of the 
 
 revolution of 1916, and most of them had just been released from British 
 prisons, because of their part therein, they squarely raised the issue of* 
 complete separation in their campaign for election. There can be no ques¬ 
 tion raised that the Irish people misunderstood the issue involved in that 
 election. It was an overwhelming majority of the people of Ireland ex¬ 
 pressing the right of self-determination and expressing their desire to estab¬ 
 
 lish an Irish republic and govern themselves. 
 
 Since that election, the executive officers have been elected and are now in 
 a position to take over the government of that country and perform all of 
 the functions of government so that the question of separation of Ireland 
 from England is not one that may become a serious problem in the future. 
 It is the present existing condition—a condition which has resulted in the 
 occupation of Ireland by a large military force with all the paraphernalia of 
 war. Large districts throughout Ireland have been occupied and the free 
 movement 'of the people has been repressed in the same manner as the move¬ 
 ments of the Belgians were repressed during the invasion of that country by 
 Germany; in other words, Ireland to-day is in a condition of insurrection 
 and England is using the same methods that were used by Germany when 
 they occupied Belgium. The right of self-government of Ireland and the 
 expression of the people for separation was supported by the American people 
 as enunciated by our President that small nations desiring self-government 
 and giving expression to that desire would have the protection of this great 
 Republic in establishing a government suitable to their desires and wishes. 
 The effect of article 10 of the covenant of the league of nations is to com¬ 
 pletely withdraw that promise of protection and to declare instead that we 
 will not permit small nations, excepting such as were in possession of the 
 enemy, to etablish and exercise the rights and functions of independent 
 government. 
 
 The men w T ho are fighting for the covenant of the league of nations as it now 
 exists with article 10 included therein are as false to the principles under which 
 we were asked to enter the war as a human being can be false to any princi¬ 
 ple, because in accepting article 10 we are doing the reverse of what we prom¬ 
 ised to do. You may ask what effect article 10 of the league of nations will 
 have on Ireland. This question involves the present international status of 
 Ireland as distinct from the wishes of the people as expressed in the last 
 election. Under international law, Ireland is recognized as an integral part of 
 the British Empire and I presume in considering article 10 you are bound to 
 recognize her status as such. This being so, in adopting that part of article 
 10 which reads as follows: 
 
 “The high contracting parties undertake to respect and preserve as against 
 external aggression the territorial, integrity and existing political independence 
 of all States members of the league. In case of any such aggression, or in case 
 of any threat or danger of such aggression, the executive council shall advise 
 upon the means by which the obligaton shall be fulfilled.” 
 
 In other words, you are undertaking to pledge this Great Republic to con¬ 
 tinue Ireland as a‘ part of the British Empire, and under article 11 you are 
 placing in the hands of the countries party to this treaty, namely the United 
 
918 
 
 TREATS OR PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 States, Great Britain, Japan, France, and Italy, and such other countries as may 
 become a party to the league, the power of determining for this body the 
 necessity of entering into a war with any country that should attempt to assist 
 the Irish people in their struggle for independence. This is not a possibility, 
 as it has arisen in the history of Ireland in the last three-centuries. In 1601 
 Spain landed armed officers in Ireland for the purpose of assisting the Irish 
 people in securing its independence. If there had been a league of nations at 
 the time, the league under articles 10 and 11 would be obliged to come to the 
 assistance of England, and had we, when we obtained our independence, become 
 a party to such league of nations, we would have been obliged to enter into war 
 with France in 1798 when Napoleon sent Gen. Humbert with 6,000 men and 
 landed in Killala Bay in Ireland for the purpose of assisting the Irish in secur¬ 
 ing independence. International conditions may bring about a similar situation 
 at any time. 
 
 The effect of article 10 is to take out of the hands of the Congress of the 
 United States the power to declare war and to place it in the hands of the 
 high contracting parties to this covenant. In other words, the adoption of the 
 covenant of the league of nations is a surrender or an attempt to surrender the 
 power to declare war which is vested in the Congress of the United States. 
 To my mind the insuperable obstacle of articles 10 and 11 is that he takes away 
 .from Congress the power of making war and places it in the hands of a body 
 other than the Congress of the United States. The granted power to Con¬ 
 gress by the States to declare war is a delegated one and is limited to the 
 power expressly granted for such powers as may be necessarily implied from the 
 granted power. The declaration in article 1, section 7, of our Constitution is, 
 “ The Congress shall hove power, among other things, to declare war.” 
 
 This section does not say that this body shall have power to delegate the 
 right to declare war to any other body. This can be done only by a constitu¬ 
 tional amendment. An amendment transferring the power to declare war 
 from Congress and give it to the high contracting parties in the league of 
 nations. 
 
 I am here first as an American citizen to protest against the adoption of the 
 league of nations; as an American citizen, a citizen of the State of Ohio and 
 an accredited representative of the Ancient Order of Hibernians of Ohio, not 
 only on the ground that such action would be unconstitutional, but on the 
 larger ground that it is wdiolly immoral for this country, the leading Republic 
 in the world, to endeavor to enter into an agreement which has for its object 
 the repression of the rights of a liberty-loving people to decide for themselves 
 the form of government under which they desire to live. 
 
 No. 15. 
 
 Statement of Matthew Cummings, of Boston, Mass., Ex-National President 
 
 of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I 
 believe that it is admitted by fair-minded men everywhere that Ireland is en¬ 
 titled to her freedom. The Governments of Australia and Canada have passed 
 resolutions repeatedly in favor of Irish freedom. The labor organizations of 
 England have gone on record demanding that justice be done to Ireland and 
 that she should be allowed to determine her own form of government. The 
 legislatures of a majority of the States in the Union have passed resolutions 
 advocating Irish independence. The House of Representatives of the United 
 States Government and later on the Senate of the United States, by a vote of 
 67 to 1 advocated freedom for Ireland and asked our representatives in Paris 
 to see to it that Ireland got a hearing at the peace conference. The Irish race 
 convention, representing 20,000,000 in America of Irish blood sent three com¬ 
 missioners to Paris for the purpose of having President Wilson and the Ameri¬ 
 can representatives at the peace coneference place the Irish question before 
 that body. 
 
 The President on this country entering the war stated repeatedly that all 
 nations must be granted the right to determine their own form of government, 
 and more than a million American boys of Irish blood fought under the Stars and 
 Stripes convinced that American success in the war meant also the freedom of 
 the land of their ancestors. If the pledges made by our Government during the 
 war are not carried out, a stigma will rest upon the splendid traditions of this 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 919 
 
 country. Therefore we appeal to you as the treaty-making power under the 
 Constitution of our country to see to it that the pledges to small nations made 
 by the Chief Executive In the dark hours of the war are fultilled and that 
 Ireland should be accorded the right of self-determination. We earnestly pro¬ 
 test against the covenant of the league of nations and ask that it be rejected 
 as a whole. We believe that it is impossible to amend it so as to protect Ameri¬ 
 can rights and sovereignty. We believe that in articles 10 and 11 of the cove¬ 
 nant of the league of nations is adopted Ireland would be deprived of her liberty 
 for all time and that the people of that long-suffering country should be given 
 an opportunity to lead their own life in their own way and under their own 
 form of government, at peace with the world and established as an independent 
 nation. 
 
 No. 16. 
 
 Statement Presented by the Advisory Committee of the Irish Victory 
 
 Fund, Boston, Mass. 
 
 The delegates to this hearing from Massachusetts, representing an over¬ 
 whelming majority of the 875,000 persons in the Irish racial group in Massa¬ 
 chusetts, wish to add their protest against the approval in any form of the 
 proposed league of nations. 
 
 The enactment of this proposed league will accomplish effectually what the 
 British Government has in various ways been trying to bring about for more 
 than a generation, to wit, the creation of a supertreaty body, which will 
 nullify the power of the whole people, as represented in the United States 
 Senate, to pass on and approve treaties with foreign Governments. 
 
 We protest against this treaty because of its certainty of economic enslave¬ 
 ment of the United States, with its inevitable consequence in unemployment 
 and attending train of evils. 
 
 Because of its geographical isolation from the sources of raw material and 
 the buying population of the United States, New England lias a peculiar 
 interest in the failure of the Paris conference to even mention, provide for, or 
 to regulate the “ freedom of the seas,” and in thus doing has, as a result of the 
 victory'- over the Central Powers, substituted the menace of British sea control, 
 based on “ navalism ” for the “ militarism ” defeated through American inter¬ 
 vention. 
 
 From the headquarters of Tory sentiment we appeal to the American spirit, 
 which in the first part of the nineteenth century opposed a similar British 
 attempt to control the seas and gave to the world the Monroe doctrine. 
 
 We appeal to the spirit which, in the forties, after the advent of the iron 
 ship, met another English attempt to control the seas by building in 15 years 
 the largest merchant marine up to that time ever produced in the world, and 
 contrast this with this attempt in the proposed league of nations again to 
 enslave the merchant marine of this country. 
 
 We appeal to the spirit which built the Panama Canal that our surplus 
 products could have opened to them the markets of the Orient, and contrast 
 it with the action which in 1913 removed by r law the preferences to American 
 shipping then obtained, and to-day in the Shantung outrage has closed to the 
 trade of the United States a market of a half-billion souls. 
 
 We protest against British dominance over the cables and mail communica¬ 
 tions of the world, and refer the committee to the recent report of the United 
 States Foreign Trade Council on this subject. 
 
 We refer the Senate committee to the report of the Senate investigation 
 committee of 1913 on the operations of the alien shipping trust, the conditions 
 then complained of and admitted to exist, which remain to-day to menace the 
 commercial future and economic progress of the United States. 
 
 We respectfully suggest to your honorable committee that they investigate 
 the stifling of American aspirations for freedom of the seas, through the in¬ 
 fluence in the various chambers of commerce and business organizations in 
 the largest cities in the United States, of the paid agents of steamship com¬ 
 panies, and others representing foreign shipping interests. 
 
 We respectfully suggest that before coming to a decision on this question 
 your honorable committee make inquiry into the action during the war of the 
 British Government, which, through “ orders in council ” not sanctioned by inter¬ 
 national law or the comity between friendly nations, committed numerous 
 
920 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 acts obviously designed to cripple our commerce and trade during the war, and 
 especially with relation to the effect of these “ orders in council ” as obvious 
 preparation for the proposed British league of nations now being considered. 
 
 We protest against any situation which permits British vessels to demand 
 and to get free wharves in practically all the cities on the Atlantic seaboard, 
 which represent approximately 5 per cent interest on an American investment 
 of $200,000,000, and which puts it within the power of the alien shipping 
 trust to deny American cities the right to do foreign business through these 
 ports, except at its pleasure. 
 
 This we do in the name of justice, of honor, and in the American spirit of 
 independence. While the United States remains on the seas by favor of any 
 foreign Government, this country is in economic slavery. 
 
 This is an American question. If America settles this question right and 
 the principles under which we entered the war are insisted on, Ireland, with 
 the rest of the world, will share in the resulting benefit. 
 
 We are Americans first, last, and always. 
 
 We ask that the present proposal for the league of nations be opposed for 
 the honor of our country. 
 
 Boston Advisory Committee 
 
 Irish Victory Fund. 
 John Morton, Chairman; 
 
 Edward F. Me Sweeney, 
 
 John H. H. McNamee, 
 
 Edward W. Quinn, 
 
 Daniel Foley, 
 
 Daniel T. O’Connell, 
 
 James O'Sullivan, 
 
 Delegates. 
 
 No. 17. 
 
 Letter of Thomas F. Cooney and Others. 
 
 Washington, D. C., August SO, 1919. 
 To the Committee on Foreign Relations , United Stales Senate , 
 
 Washington , D. C. 
 
 Sirs : The Irish race of Rhode Island, through its duly-accredited represen¬ 
 tatives, in attendance at a meeting of your committee, held on Saturday, 
 August 30, 1919, to consider a proposed league of nations, hereby enters its 
 protest against the adoption of the proposed league in its present form. 
 
 The reasons for our protest are: That it is un-American in that it means 
 the abandonment of the traditions and ideals for which this country has 
 always stood; that it creates an alliance with European powers and forces us 
 to take part in the embroilments of those powers; that it means the enslave¬ 
 ment of millions of people; and that it denies to those people the right to de¬ 
 termine for themselves the form of government under which they want to 
 live; and that it means the absolute surrender of the principles for which 
 this country fought. 
 
 Further, we protest against the ratification of the proposed league and peace 
 treaty, because it fails to recognize the government of the republic of Ireland, 
 a government that is the choice of 80 per cent of the people of Ireland, and 
 which is prevented from functioning in every department because of the 
 military power maintained by England in Ireland—a military that is brutal 
 and savage in its treatment of the Irish people. 
 
 Further, it condones and perpetuates a flagrant breach of the promises made 
 by the representatives of England in procuring the entrance of the United 
 States into the war. 
 
 The representatives of the Irish race in Rhode Island urge upon your con¬ 
 sideration, in support of this protest, the numberless and invaluable contri¬ 
 butions of the Irish in establishing and maintaining the American form of 
 government, to which they have looked throughout its history for encourage¬ 
 ment and support of the inalienable right of freedom—“ That government of 
 the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” 
 
 The protest herewith presented is submitted by us primarily as American 
 citizens, mindful of the debt of gratitude owed by our country to Ireland, and 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 921 
 
 desirous of preserving the fundamental principles of our government in their 
 pristine strength and purity. 
 
 The Irish Race of Rhode island, 
 By Thomas F. Cooney. 
 
 Cornelius C. Moon. 
 
 Patrick J. Murphy. 
 
 Daniel E. Doherty. 
 
 No. 18. 
 
 Telegram to Congressman Nolan Representing the Unanimous Sentiment 
 of the Irish Societies of California Against Section 10 of the League of 
 Nations. 
 
 San Francisco, Calif., August 29. 
 
 Hon. John I. Nolan, Washington D. C. 
 
 Please represent our San Francisco and nothern California societies and Irish 
 freedom fund commute© of California at hearing before committee to-morrow 
 morning. 
 
 Andrew J. Gallagher. 
 
 No. 19. 
 
 Joint Statement of Michael L. Fahey, Paul F. Spain, and Joseph T. Bren¬ 
 nan, of Boston, Mass. 
 
 Ireland’s claim for independence was given a new birth upon the declaration 
 of President Wilson when our nation joined in the contest for the defeat of Ger¬ 
 many. For centuries her patriots had waged the fight for freedom against a 
 world tyrant, against a people who dominated through force, a people who 
 ruled with an iron hand, wiiose hands were red with blood and wiio were guilty 
 of the most abominable crimes. 
 
 What country in all the w r orld has suffered as Ireland in the contest to regain 
 Independence? The most outrageous crime, and the one to which little atten¬ 
 tion has been given, which England perpetrated upon the Irish people occurred 
 during the nineteenth century, w T hen, through its cruel law^s, the Irish people 
 were scattered throughout the world. But that result, as show r n to-day, strength¬ 
 ened her people, and to-day their power will be showrn to be sufficiently strong 
 to compel England to grant to Ireland the independence her people have long 
 prayed for. 
 
 No. 20. 
 
 Statement of Hugh O’Neill, of Chicago, Speaking as a Representative of 
 the Committee of One Hundred for an Irish Republic. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee. 
 
 The Americans of the Irish race in the great Middle West, as in all other 
 parts of America, urge the defeat of the proposed league of nations because it 
 impairs the sovereignty of the United States, violates the principles for which 
 we entered the war, creates an unholy alliance, nullifies the Declaration of 
 Independence, creates a superstate, endangers the Constitution, destroys the 
 Monroe doctrine, recognizes the breakdown of nationalism and the creation of 
 an international pow r er, gives to England the control of the seas, and guarantees 
 to England the possession of Ireland against the w r ish of the Irish people. 
 
 The league of nations impairs the sovereignty of the United States because 
 it places the United States Government under the control of a superstate 
 operating through an assembly and a council, the United States in the assem¬ 
 bly having only 1 vote in 45, and England saving 6 and the practical control 
 of the majority of the other votes, and in the council only 1 vote in 9 and 
 no vote at all wiien her interests are at stake. Because it requires us to 
 maintain permanent armies upon foreign soil to police the discontented sub¬ 
 jects of bloated monarchies or crush the tumults of peoples indulging in the 
 wild theories of socialism or anarchy. 
 
922 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 Because it takes away from the United States Congress the right to de¬ 
 clare war or conclude peace. Because it creates a supergovernment that 
 would be an unrestrained and unlimited trust which would dominate our 
 international and domestic affairs. The league of nations violates the prin¬ 
 ciples for which America entered the war, and as the President, the spokes¬ 
 man of America, says, “ We entered the war for the ultimate peace of the 
 world and for the liberation of its people; for the rights of nations great and 
 small and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their own way of life 
 and obedience; for the reign of law based upon the consent of the governed; 
 for the rights and liberties of small nations; for affording material guaranties 
 of political and territorial independence for great and small nations alike. 
 
 “ We are fighting for the liberty, the self government, and vindicated de¬ 
 velopment of all people.” (May 26, 1917.) “And that the people of the world 
 shall choose their own masters and govern their own destinies, not as we wish, 
 but as they wish.” 
 
 The league of nations creates an unholy alliance and violates .the doctrine 
 of George Washington as to no entangling alliances. Are we ready to admit 
 that Washington was a dreamer, that nationlism has broken down, and that 
 a Bolsheviki internationalism shall be the form of our new freedom? An 
 alliance would be destructive of American liberty, and an alliance wfith Eng¬ 
 land in a league of nations would be abhorrent to the great body of the 
 American people. 
 
 The league of nations would nullify the Declaration of Independence because 
 it ignores the fundamental truth declared as the basis of good Government 
 that all just governments derive their powers from the consent of the gov¬ 
 erned. It ignores the self-evident truth that all peoples are born free and 
 equal, because it w T ould leave the Irish in political servitude and seal their 
 doom by article 10, which guarantees the territorial integrity of the signatory 
 powers. 
 
 The league of nations endangers the Constitution because it suspends the 
 guarantees of the United States and the State constitution. It limits the 
 functions of the Congress, limits the jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts of the 
 United States, and dislodges the powers of both the legislative and judicial 
 branches and either assumes them or places them under the control of the 
 President, thereby making him a virtual dictator. 
 
 The league of nations destroys the Monroe Doctrine as it takes away from 
 It the character of a national policy and reduces it to the level of a regional 
 understudy. 
 
 For these reasons we are unalterably opposed to the league of nations. 
 
 No. 21. 
 
 Statement of Richard W. Wolfe, of Chicago, Former President Cook 
 County Real Estate Board of Chicago, in Behalf of the Committee of 
 100 for an Irish Republic. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am opposed to the proposed league of 
 nations because its provisions are in opposition to the great principles for 
 which our country fought in the big war, to make the world safe for democ¬ 
 racy and to secure the rights of small nations. This denial of the principles 
 for which we fought has filled the hearts of American citizens wfith dis¬ 
 appointment, dissatisfaction, and unrest. 
 
 I am further opposed to the proposed league of nations because it would 
 doom Ireland to perpetual servitude to England. To do this would be a 
 grave injustice not only to Ireland but also a grave w T rong to America. 
 
 You, gentlemen, have red blood in your veins, and you resent an insult. 
 You are human, and you resist and strike back at anybody or anything that 
 robs you of your property, your rights, and opportunities. 
 
 It is because of these very human reasons that the Irish question is an 
 American question. We of the Irish race in America resent insult and resist 
 and strike back at the enemy w-ho w’ould rob us and assassinate our char¬ 
 acter. England in order to maintain her hold upon Ireland thinks it desira¬ 
 ble to destroy the influence, assassinate the character and injure in every 
 conceivable v T ay the Irish race in this country. So that it takes 10, 20, or 30 
 per cent more brains and more energy for a man of the Irish race than for 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 923 
 
 a man of the English or Scotch races, or other races to accomplish the same 
 results in this country. Now, there can not be inflicted upon a part of the 
 community or a part of the nation a loss or injury without corresponding 
 loss and injury to the community or the nation as a whole. 
 
 The stage Irishman was manufactured in the London music halls and 
 shipped to this country to aid the deadly work of the murderer of the Irish 
 character by that deadliest of weapons, ridicule. Newspapers, books, periodi¬ 
 cals, the lecture platform^and more recently the motion picture—every avenue 
 of publicity—has been used to besmirch the Irish race in America. Provost 
 Marshal Crowder has reported that the percentage of Irish who waived ex¬ 
 emption was much higher than that of English or Scotch or other races. But 
 the English propagandists would have us believe differently. England has 
 spent millions for propaganda, and the lies told about the Irish are enough 
 to curse the world. It is, I submit, sound American policy to remove the 
 cause of this friction, of this humiliation, insult, and injury to American 
 citizens of the Irish race. The cause is the enslavement of Ireland by England. 
 A free Ireland would remove the motive for English attack upon American 
 citizens of the Irish race. 
 
 Besides, it would, more than anything else, help to bring about that which 
 every good American citizen wants to see, that it is a hamonious American 
 nation, all of the races coming together in the melting pot, and commingling 
 and uniting for the common good of the Republic. There should be no 
 friction between the English race and the Irish race in this country, and there 
 would be none if Ireland were free, because then the business of the propa¬ 
 gandist was at an end. The paid lecturers spreading poison and hate against 
 the Irish race in America would be out of a job. The Irish question is an 
 American question, and we appeal to you to look upon it as such. 
 
 We went to war to right the wrongs of small nations, to make democracy 
 safe for the world. Ireland by a plebiscite has declared for a republic. Indeed, 
 Ireland is the only one of the small nations that has had a plebiscite and 
 expressed its self-determination. How can any American consistently deny 
 Ireland’s right to a republican form of government? How can any American 
 deny a republic in favor of an empire with a caste system which is mediocre 
 where the law of primogeniture and entail persists, where a state church takes 
 part in government, where a house of lords rules with all its power of titles, 
 wealth, and prestige? 
 
 Ireland’s case furnishes the supreme example of merciless profiteering and 
 exploitation. Let us take the figures on Irish population. I quote from a 
 British publication, the Statesman’s Year Book. It shows that in the year 
 1800 the population of Ireland was G,000,000, while the population of England 
 was 8,000,000. In 1850 the population of Ireland rose to nearly 9,000,000. 
 The population of Ireland to-day is less than 4,500,000. The population of 
 England is 3G,000,000. John Stuart Mill, the English economist, has stated 
 that Ireland can support a population of 25,000,000. And everyone who knows 
 anything about it knows that Ireland can support a population of 25,000,000 
 to 30,000,000. Belgium has a poulation of 8,000,000 and is less than one-third 
 the size of Ireland. Belgium and Holland combined are not so large as Ireland. 
 The decline in population is an arrow sign as to Ireland’s decay in other ways— 
 industrially, socially, educationally. Before the war Ireland was doing less 
 than one-third of 1 per cent of the export business of the United Kingdom. 
 
 The ruling class of England is blind, as privileged classes have always been 
 blind. If it was not blind, this English ruling class would realize that Ireland 
 fully populated and prosperous would be a better customer and certainly a 
 better' friend to England than Ireland depopulated and disaffected. Ireland 
 would be a profitable customer of this country, far more so than countries far 
 away whose trade we are eager too get. Ireland occupies a very advantageous 
 positio'n in the highway of commerce, a position similar to that of important 
 business corners in the center of city life. 
 
 Ireland free w r ould be a country of 25,000,000 to 30,000,000, prosperous and 
 thriving, and of great potential value to America. 
 
 The question is asked, Would we go to war with England to free Ireland? 
 That is not a fair or honest question. That question is not now before us. 
 That question was settled when we went into the war for democracy and the 
 rights of small nations, and when England accepted our aid with that declara¬ 
 tion sent out to the world. To keep faith with our soldiers dead in France and 
 Flanders and other parts of the world, to keep faith with the crippled and 
 
924 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 maimed, to keep faith with weeping mothers and sad firesides of America, that 
 Is the question now confronting us. We ask you to save American honor. 
 It is not America, but England, that -would go to war should you decide to 
 preserve the faith. England will not dare do it. 
 
 No. 22. 
 
 Address of Mb. Shaemas O’Sheel, Representing the William Pearse Branch 
 
 of the Friends of Irish Freedom and the William Rooney Society, Both 
 
 of New York. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Senators of the committee, within recent months not only 
 have I been made aware of the sentiments of the two socities which I have 
 the honor to represent here, but, having addressed 46 audiences in New York, New 
 Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, I have 
 felt the pulse of thousands of American citizens, and I am convinced that in the 
 two thoughts which are all I shall try to present to you I correctly represent 
 very widespread and deeply felt convictions. 
 
 In the first place, Americans of Irish blood oppose any such league of nations 
 as here proposed far more vehemently from a purely American standpoint than 
 from any thought for Ireland. A fact w r hich is proved by the earnest and 
 thoroughgoing approval which every audience I have addressed has expressed 
 -when I said that if Irish-Americans were to be offered the bribe of immediate 
 liberation of Ireland, with the repayment to Ireland of every penny ever 
 drained out of her by England as the price of their support of a league which 
 would infringe American rights, there -would not be a man or woman of all 
 the millions of them who would consider the proposition for a minute. 
 
 The other thought is this: Two or three Senators have asserted that Ireland’s 
 real hope for liberation must be found in paragraph 2 of Article XI of the 
 present league-of-nations covenant, which reads: 
 
 “ It is also declared to be the fundamental right of each member of the 
 league to bring to the attention of the assembly or of the council any circum¬ 
 stance whatever affecting international relations which threatens to disturb 
 either the peace or the good understanding between nations upon which peace 
 depends.” 
 
 The idea advanced is that under this paragraph a member of the league 
 might befriend Ireland by bringing its condition under military rule to the 
 attention of the governing bodies of the league. That is undoubtedly true—- 
 so true that the English authors of the league covenant have guarded against 
 it by a paragraph which I think has not yet been noticed to-day, paragraph 7 
 of Article XY, as follows: 
 
 “ If the dispute between the parties is claimed by one of them and is found 
 by the council to arise out of a matter which by international law is solely 
 within the domestic jurisdiction of that party the council shall so report and 
 shall make no recommendations as to its settlement.” 
 
 It has been proved here to-day beyond even the attempt to question that the 
 case of Ireland is not a domestic matter, but under all international law an 
 international matter ; but that is not the point; the point is that the council shall 
 decide whether they will consider and promulgate it as a domestic or an inter¬ 
 national matter. If they decide that it is domestic, that is the end. If the 
 people of Ireland were being slaughtered and the American people were aflame 
 to help them, our Government could not even protest further after the council 
 shall have decided that massacre of the Irish people is an English domestic 
 concern. Surely it will be said the American members of council and assembly 
 would never in such circumstances agree to such an interpretation, but if they 
 did not and all others did, there being no unanimous decision, surely the 
 majority decision would necessarily prevail to the extent of estoppng all action 
 by the leage or its members. 
 
 “And the final point to consider is that this paragraph was not in the original 
 draft of the league made public in February, but added entirely anew in the 
 revised draft—purposely, I believe, Mr. Chairman, purposely to further safe¬ 
 guard England against American sympathy for Ireland being expressed 
 through the league. I thank you.” 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 925 
 
 No. 23. 
 
 Statement of R. E. O’Malley, of Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Gentlemen : I am here as the authorized representative of the Irish-Ameri- 
 can Societies of Kansas City, Mo., having a membership of more than 5,000 
 persons. I know of no better method of expressing their opinion on this im¬ 
 portant question than to file with you a set of resolutions adopted at the thirty- 
 second annual picnic of the Irish-American Societies, of Kansas City, Mo., held 
 in Fairmont Park on Sunday, August 17. 
 
 The majority of the people I represent are American born and of Irish 
 ancestry. 
 
 In addition to the sentiments expressed in the resolutions filed herewith, I 
 think I can say without fear of truthful contradiction that a great majority 
 of the people of my community are opposed to the document known as the 
 League of Nations and opposed to any document that might involve this Nation 
 in entangling alliances. 
 
 (The resolutions referred to follow 7 :) 
 
 Whereas there is now before the Senate of the United States for that body’s 
 ratification or rejection an instrument knowrn as the league of nations 
 covenant; and 
 
 Whereas, article 3 of said covenant gives the British six votes in the league’s 
 assembly to America’s one, even in passing on America’s questions. We, 
 with a hundred million population, are given only the same voting pow 7 er as 
 the negro Republic of Liberia in Africa, the nondescript kingdom of Hedjaz 
 in Asia, and the semisavage island of Ilayti in the Caribbean Sea; and 
 Whereas under article 8 the representatives of foreign nations advise us 
 what size fleet and army America should have; and, once the size is agreed 
 on, it con never be increased except by the unanimous consent of those for¬ 
 eign nations; and 
 
 Whereas article 10 binds us to make war for monarchies against smaller na¬ 
 tions seeking freedom from imperialism, militarism and tyranny, should 
 any one of said smaller nations in its struggle for freedom receive help from 
 outside sources such as was given our own beloved country by France in 
 the Revolutionary War, such as we gave the Republic of Cuba in its struggle 
 for freedom from the horrible atrocities inflicted on it by the Spanish King¬ 
 dom. Under article 10 we are bound if China should ever attempt to recover 
 Shantung, which is under the peace treaty given to Japan, to w r age war 
 against a friendly people, who have patterned their Government after our 
 own, in the interest of a pagan monarchy. Likewise, should the recently 
 formed Irish republic resist further misrule by Britain and outside aid 
 is given her, we as Americans are compelled to send our boys across the 
 seas to fight a people struggling for freedom from oppression, a people that 
 in America’s struggle against the same nation that is now the oppressor of 
 the Irish race gave their encouragement, sympathy, men and a sum of 
 $300,000, a large sum indeed at that time, for the cause of American inde¬ 
 pendence; Therefore be it 
 
 Resolved , That the Irish-American societies of Kansas City, Mo., gathered 
 at their thirty-first annual picnic, held at Fairmount Park, Sunday, August 17, 
 1919, gratefully acknowledge the patriotic service Senator James A. Reed 
 is rendering our country in his able and courageous opposition in the Senate 
 of the United States to this measure and respectfully urge Senator Selden P. 
 Spencer to join with Senator Reed in an unrelenting effort to prevent this 
 shameful abdication of this Nation’s sovereignty and this unwarranted attempt 
 to make Great Britain a super-state with six votes, while out great Republic, 
 which is and should remain the leading Nation of the world, is ranked along¬ 
 side the petty kingdoms and barbaric nations of the world. Be it further 
 Resolved, That w T e most heartily approve the Mason resolution appropriating 
 necessary funds for the establishment and maintenance of diplomatic repre¬ 
 sentation to the republic of Ireland and that copies of these resolutions be 
 forwarded by the chairman of this gathering to the distinguished Senators 
 mentioned herein and to the lion. William T. Bland, Representative in Con¬ 
 gress from this district; also to the press of the State. 
 
926 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 No. 24. 
 
 Unanimously Adopted dy the Delegates to the Central Labor Union of 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa., July 13, 1919. 
 
 Presented by William J. Boyle of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Resolved, That this Central Labor Union, representing upward of 300,000 
 workmen, record its protest against the adoption by the United State,-, of the 
 league of nations as at present constituted. It has even been the policy of 
 America to encourage democracy everywhere and it is unthinkable that we 
 should now array ourselves on the side of autocracy by agreeing to article 10 of 
 the covenant of the league of nations, which would compel us to aid in keeping 
 millions of the people of the world in perpetual bondage. We abhor the 
 thought that any group of men other than Americans be empowered to dictate 
 our policies in peace or war. Our slogan is, “ America first,” and we especially 
 approve that part of the resolution adopted by the delegates to the American 
 Federation of Labor convention held in Atlantic City, N. J., June 9-30, 1919, 
 which declares, “That nothing in the league of nations con be construed as 
 in any way interfering with the freedom of Ireland as recognized by the vote 
 of this covention.” 
 
 No. 25. 
 
 Statement of Edward F. McSweeney, of Boston, Member of the Advisory 
 Committee of the Irish Victory Fund and National Officer Friends 
 of Irish Freedom. 
 
 As I have stated in a series of articles published by the Boston American, 
 the desperate need of civilization today is peace—from armed strife; from 
 capitalistic oppression; from industrial terrorism; to get the world back to a 
 semblance of brotherhood between men. Above all, the Americon people want 
 peace with honor. Only two years ago a presidential election was won on the 
 slogan that “ He kept us out of war.” At that time Belgium had been occupied 
 for more than three years; the richest parts of France were in the hands of 
 the Germans and the allied enemy was irresistibly pushing forward to control 
 of the channel ports; England was threatened with invation and starvation. 
 For three years and three months the world was ringing with stories of atroci¬ 
 ties, outrages, barbarism; yet the American people were so opposed to war 
 that even with all the facts before them they decided the choice of the greatest 
 officer in the world on the antiwar issue. 
 
 At this time the German plans for world control were substantially consum¬ 
 mated, the Teutonic dream of centuries was about to come true. From Berlin 
 to the Persian Gulf the Central Powers were practically in mastery, and with 
 the ultimate victory which was admitted unless America intervened, Germany 
 would retain its control over South Africa, which, with Siberia, will in another 
 generation be the source of the world’s food supply. 
 
 The imminent collapse of Russia assured German control of the wealth of 
 food and minerals of Siberia and the other undeveloped parts of the former 
 dominion of the Romanoffs. 
 
 GERMANS FOUGHT WITHOUT PRETENSE. 
 
 Moreover, there was no German pretense about the rights of small people, 
 self-determination, freedom, or democracy. 
 
 German control was autocracy, based on the power of might over right. 
 
 When the presidential campaign was held in 1916 this was the exact situation 
 in Europe, yet a majority of the voters in the United States voted to reelect 
 the President who had asked for their support because “ he kept us out of 
 war.” 
 
 When, in response to the urging of the Allies, the President, in'1917, an¬ 
 nounced that American intervention was necessary, he laid down, in language 
 which seemed divinely inspired, a declaration of purposes which made partici¬ 
 pation seem a holy cause—another Crusade to save the world from sin; to 
 repeat in our generation the story of the American Revolution. With purest 
 altruism and without hope of reward, the United States entered the war to 
 insure for the world forever the things for which Washington fought and 
 secured by American independence. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 927 
 
 The war was won by the intervention of the United States, and to-day, 
 eight months after the signing of the armistice, the national delirium of joy 
 shown at its ending has not been justified. The great, patient, loyal heart of 
 America is uneasy. The end of the war has brought, not happiness and con¬ 
 tentment, but doubt and apprehension. 
 
 At the root of the national distress is disappointment at the failure of the 
 United States’ delegates to the peace conference to fulfill the solemn promises 
 made to the nation when it entered and won the war; to the 4,000,000 young 
 men called into armed service, 75,000 of whom were killed believing that they died 
 for a high ideal; and to the 250,000 more or less permanently maimed, each ono 
 a living demand for redemption of our pledges. 
 
 The altruistic and unselfish spirit which flamed into action with the Presi¬ 
 dent’s declarations of the purposes for which he made the call for arms has 
 not changed in the slightest. The United States asks for nothing, wants nothing 
 but it has awakened to the fact that after defeaing German military despotism 
 it is now asked to abandon American ideals a,nd repudiate America. Having 
 won the war, the United States is denied the right to dictate any vital part of 
 the peace pledges to accept a monarchical dominance, based on “ navalism.” It 
 welcomed eagerly the idea pf a league of nations which was in line with the 
 declaration which caused us to enter the war, but as the facts became known, 
 the people are determined to repudiate the proposed “ league of nations,” written 
 by Lord Cecil, which, in its lengthy preamble, does not even mention or hint at 
 “liberty,” or “self-determination,” while confirming mastery of the world in the 
 great powers. At its best, the proposed league of nations is a provocation to 
 war, and at its worst a buttress of imperialism. 
 
 ENGLAND BLAMED FOR GREAT WAR. 
 
 The nation, willing to make full allowances for the necessary give and take 
 of conflicting national interests to achieve the main end in view, has been 
 reluctantly forced to believe that if the peace conference had insisted on a 
 peace based on our declaration of purposes made before we entered the war 
 the world would to-day be well on the road to peace, and that the seduction 
 of American ideals and pledges by allied flattery, intrigue, and power of per¬ 
 suasion will, if confirmed by the Senate, establish with crushing force the 
 secret treaty agreements; regarding which, on April 7, 1917, at Leeds, President 
 Jowett, of the independent labor party of England, said: “ The world war 
 came as the result of England’s secret treaties.” 
 
 It will perpetuate the diplomatic intrigues and selfish balance-of-power 
 agreements with their inevitable consequences of human, racial, and economic 
 oppression, which it was the hope of the United States the war would remove 
 forever. 
 
 The league of nations, in short, will undo the work of the American Revolu¬ 
 tion. It will make Great Britain supreme in the world. Under the pretense 
 of friendship it is a carefully laid and skillfully worked out plan to retain, 
 hamper, and dwarf the power of the United States to progress to its manifest 
 destiny to be the leading commercial nation of the world, a consummation 
 urgently to be desired in the interest of civilization, because the history of the 
 United States has proved that its progress has ever been accompanied by a 
 willingness to give equal freedom to all, as opposed to the repressive and arro¬ 
 gant overlordship which has been the distinguishing characteristic of British 
 control, which for centuries has made it a definite policy to cripple or remove 
 by whatever means at hand its business rivals. 
 
 ' It was British hatred of colonial progress and hope to destroy a potential 
 commercial- rival that caused the American Revolution. 
 
 It destroyed the commerce of Holland, Spain, and France. 
 
 It has repeatedly tried to control or destroy the commerce of the United 
 states. Every time it has had opportunity it has shown its hatred of this 
 country: 
 
 It has now destroyed Germany and would again control this country. 
 
 It went to war with China to force it to accept the opium trade, and then 
 took Hongkong and $30,000,000 indemnity. 
 
 IRISH OPPOSITION TO PACT. 
 
 The Irish stock in America has found here economic, religious, and political 
 freedom. Their first allegiance is here. They are, above all, Americans. 
 Bitter experience for centuries of the economic, political, and religious degrada- 
 
928 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 tion, due to English rule and intimate knowledge of the various processes by 
 which Great Britain reaches its goal, has given the States Senate permits 
 our best friend among the nations to be wronged, stolen its principal com¬ 
 mercial district from China to be exploited by Britain’s partner in the Orient, 
 Japan, which did not send a soldier to Europe to aid the war. 
 
 While the nation abhors war, there is a price which is too high to be paid 
 for a shameful peace. This is a strictly American question, yet the commonest 
 defense of the league is that opposition to it is stirred up wholly by Irish 
 hatred of England. That the American Irish are against the league proposed 
 is true, but not for the reason given. The first object of every person of Irish 
 blood in this country is the safety, prosperity, and happiness of the United 
 States. 
 
 As they made the largest single racial contribution to the armed forces of the 
 United States during the war, they are to-day the largest single racial force 
 in the present struggle to save America from the consequences of the surrender 
 of American liberty at the Paris conference. 
 
 APATHY ABROAD REGARDING LEAGUE. 
 
 This much may be said in addition—if the persons of Irish blood in the 
 United States, who accepted without reservation the President’s promises and 
 in every way met the call in men, money, and war service, not obtruding them¬ 
 selves, keeping quiet under a systematized campaign of falsehood and -mis¬ 
 representation, would now consent to remain silent under the fact that they 
 are under this proposed league marked to be the only subject white race 
 on earth, they would in justice forfeit the respect of all men—worse than 
 this—they would lose their self-respect, and thus prepare the way for an 
 automatic discrimination against themselves in every field of human activities. 
 As Americans first, however, they put the United States first. When its liberty 
 and future are safeguarded, Ireland will incidentally be benefited, because 
 there is no difference in the principle involved. 
 
 The astounding fact is that the United States is the only Nation where the 
 league of nations is taken seriously. The apathy concerning it among the allied 
 nations is because it is known to be what it actually is: A British plan to get 
 dominance over the United States, which the other nations are satisfied to let 
 happen, while each (with the exception of Italy), shares in the division of loot 
 parceled out in secret treaties made during the war, and confirmed in Lord 
 Cecil’s league of nations. 
 
 As the creditor Nation of the world, the only one with no ax to grind, the 
 United States was in a position to command compliance in the peace negotiations 
 with the ideal which forced it into the war. At the beginning every wish was 
 complied with. When President Wilson proposed the ridiculous conference in the 
 Sea of Marmora with the Russian Reds, the conference smiled, shrugged its 
 diplomatic shoulders, and consented, whereupon Mr. Wilson appointed as the rep¬ 
 resentative of the United States the Rev. Herron, whose peculiar notions re¬ 
 garding marriage and other long-observed American ideals are, to say the least, 
 liberal. Inasmuch as the Nation has since the war become familiar with the 
 Herron type of internationalists, who have come into prominence and power, it 
 loyally gagged hard and swallowed. The Prince’s Island conference, as the wise 
 ones who voted for it expected, never was held. 
 
 EUROPEAN “ GRATITUDE ” PATHETIC. 
 
 The gratitude of the people of the European nations to the United States as 
 represented in its Chief Executive was pathetic. They believed that he was the 
 magic-worker—they wanted and expected him to give to them peace, three meals 
 a day, and a roof over their head, and got a Pandora’s box, from which the 
 colony of mischiefs is escaping despite the assurance that it would remain closed. 
 The world, and the United States in particular, is beginning to realize what 
 Wellington meant when he said after Waterloo: “There is only one thing worse 
 than defeat—victory.” 
 
 France has so little confidence in the league, as a power to restrain war, that 
 it insisted on and obtained a separate defensive alliance with the United States. 
 
 In the Belgian Chamber of Deputies on August 8 the premier said that the 
 league offered Belgium so little guaranty of peace that it forces that nation to 
 look to its own defense. Italy, which alone has been denied its secret-treaty loot, 
 is defiant and resentful. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 929 
 
 When the league was presented to the British Parliament, Its reception, 
 according to the London press, was derisive laughter, the joke being at the ex¬ 
 pense of the United States. It was naturally not opposed. 
 
 The King of England paid unprecedented honor to Lloyd-George on his home- 
 coining from Paris because of his diplomatic victories for Britain, and well he 
 might. While the power of every other monarchy has been lessened, where not 
 abolished, Great Britain is in political control of every third human being ori 
 earth, and is absolute on the seas; its only formidable European rival is out of 
 the way; it has only one real business competitor left—the United States, 
 which it obviously proposes to subdue by the arts in which it has no peer— 
 diplomatic finesse, flattery, deception, intrigue. 
 
 To accomplish this end a campaign of British misrepresentation has been 
 permitted to be carried on in this country and in South America, in which 
 country it is designed to stifle, obstruct, ond control the competition of the 
 United States. In the United States it has largely been directed to isolate the 
 Irish question from the other questions of British imperial policy in their rela¬ 
 tion to American interests to force it forward as matter peculiar to the Irish 
 and by invoking religious, racial, and personal passions, in the intensity of the 
 controversy, to sidetrack discussion of matters of vital interest. 
 
 Decided on merit, there can be no permanent union between the government 
 theories of Britain and the United States. It is the marriage of the serpent 
 and the dove, doomed in advance to disaster. 
 
 “ MILITARISM ” AND “ NAVALISM.” 
 
 There Is no difference to the future of liberty between “ militarism ” as repre¬ 
 sented by Germany and “ navalism,” which is the power behind the Govern¬ 
 ment whose policy is thus explained by Lord Thring: 
 
 “ The means by which the possessions of Great Britain were acquired have 
 been various as the possessions themselves. What is the link which fastens 
 each of these possessions to the mother country? The inherent and indestructi¬ 
 ble right to exercise imperial powers; in other words, the supremacy of the 
 Queen and the British Parliament. What, again, is the common bond of union 
 between these vast colonial possessions, differing in laws, in religion, and in 
 the character of the population? The same answer must be given, namely, the 
 sovereignty of Great Britain. The mode in which the materials composing the 
 British Empire have been cemented together is exactly the reverse of the man¬ 
 ner of the construction of the American Union. In the case of the American 
 Union independent States voluntarily relinquisheed a portion of their sover¬ 
 eignty to secure national unity, and intrusted the guardianship of that unity to 
 a representative body chosen by themselves.” 
 
 While Lord Thring is in error in his conception of the “ guardianship ” of 
 American sovereignty, which reposes in the people alone, he draws a correct 
 picture of the power of British sovereignty, the exact opposite of the purposes 
 of which the United States entered the war. With “ militarism ” temporarily 
 defeated, inevitably to grow again if the league of nations is approved by the 
 United States, the present fight is on “ navalism,” the present and future 
 menace of world peace. 
 
 HOW ENGLAND HAS DOMINATED THE WORLD. 
 
 With the exception of one decade in the nineteenth century, about the fifties, 
 when the United States awakened and took the control of the seas, only to 
 relinquish it again with the coming of the Civil War, England, by the pow T er 
 of her navy, has absolutely dominated the world. 
 
 When the armistice was signed in November, 1918, the United States had a 
 quarter of a million more soldiers in France than Great Britain, the balance of 
 -British soldiers necessary to equalize the number of United States forces at the 
 front having been diverted to police duty in Egypt, India, and Ireland. 
 
 The British Navy was strengthened constantly during the war. The United 
 States was permitted to build a merchant marine, but without freedom of the 
 seas, which was not even brought up for discussion at Paris. England retains 
 the power over the United States that it has exercised for a generation to 
 control rates, freights, sailings, and ports, which leaves this country in com¬ 
 mercial bondage to it. As a result the workingmen of the United States are in 
 imminent danger of being unemployed for four months of each year. 
 
930 
 
 THE AT Y OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 Secretary Lansing made two statements in his testimony before the Senate 
 Committee on Foreign Relations, either of which is sufficient to justify the 
 defeat of the league of nations as being inimical to the future of American 
 commerce. 
 
 One was that the “ freedom of the seas was not discussed.” While it later 
 appeared in President Wilson’s belated submission of his draft that a weak and 
 innocuous mention was made of this subject, it did not even skim the surface 
 of “ navalism,” the real menace of world peace. And the other, that the secret 
 treaty between England and Japan, by which England gave something she did 
 not own to a nation which had no right to receive it, was known before the 
 terms of the peace treaty were decided, and objection was made against it to 
 Mr. Wilson, without effect, by himself and his colleagues. 
 
 When the nation contrasts the verbal chastisement which Mr. Wilson gave 
 Italy over the Fiume claims, largely of academic interest to this country, with 
 his concealment and final indorsement, against the advice of his colleagues, of 
 the pro-English-anti-American antihonor and decency Shantung deal, it must 
 be admitted that the American people have shown wonderful patience, although 
 there is little doubt of their resentment and determined opposition, which will 
 be shown in the final action of the United States Senate. 
 
 The President has decided, however, that the league must go through, what¬ 
 ever happens, and, with his marvelous skill in phrasing, dragged into his ad¬ 
 dress to Congress on the “ cost of living ” an appeal to wage earners to come 
 to his assistance. Before doing this, workmen and manufacturers should con¬ 
 sider the consequences to themselves, their families, and the Nation. 
 
 Sir Walter Raleigh said that the control of shipping meant control of world 
 trade, and this meant control of the world. 
 
 For more than 20 years the need of a foreign market for the surplus products 
 of the United States has been manifest. To facilitate access to the trade of the 
 Orient and the Far East, which is thrown away by the Shantung steal, President 
 Roosevelt built the Panama Canal to offset the advantages to British shipping 
 of the Suez Canal. When it was completed, an advantage to American ships 
 using it was given by law. This displeased Great Britain, which protested with¬ 
 out effect until the Democratic administration came into power in 1913, when, 
 in violation of campaign promises, the law was repealed. 
 
 Britain was not only mistress of the seas, but could and did control adversely 
 the internal policies of this country designed to encourage and extend our sea 
 power. 
 
 Under improved methods of production, tremendously stimulated by the war, 
 the workers of the United States can produce in eight months all that the coun¬ 
 try can consume in a year. The solution of unemployment and its accompanying 
 evils is in disposing of our surplus products of manufacture in the open markets 
 of the world. The neglect, as admitted by Secretary Lansing, even to discuss at 
 Paris the matter of the freedom of the seas is unexplainable, when we realize 
 that in a United States Senate investigation held in 1913, recorded in several 
 volumes of testimony, it was conclusively demonstrated, and admitted by the 
 representatives of the Shipping Trust, that under trust methods it was impos¬ 
 sible for the United States before the war to build or maintain a merchant 
 marine. 
 
 HOW FOREIGNERS HIT BOSTON PORT. 
 
 A small body of foreigners sitting in an office in London could, and did, not 
 only determine the price and character of American freight, but could determine 
 and limit the ports in America from which freight end passengers could be sent. 
 Means were provided where competition by independent American transportation 
 companies was made impossible. Baltimore, Boston, and Philadelphia were 
 forced to build and maintain expensive marine terminals, the use of which the 
 Shipping Trust received free, while the alien ships receiving these favors had 
 to pay for similar facilities in their home ports. 
 
 This was possible only because it was within the power of the Shipping Trust 
 to close to foreign trade any one of these ports refusing to comply with its 
 demands. 
 
 Neglect of the United States after the Civil War to maintain its sea strength 
 left it at the beginning of the great war with its merchant marine only two- 
 fifths what it was in 1855 and substantially the same tonnage as the United 
 States had in 1810. 
 
 Under Shipping Trust control exports of the United States were restricted 
 largely to the food and raw materials which Europe could not get along without. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY, 
 
 931 
 
 As a result of this control, the price of products, such as cotton, copper, pot¬ 
 ash, food, meat, and grains was in most cases dominated in England, and in 
 some combinations by England and Germany together. 
 
 ENGLAND FLOUTS AMERICAN RIGHTS. 
 
 During the war England contemptuously disregarded and opposed our busi¬ 
 ness rights. It held up our ships dealing with neutral nations, blacklisted and 
 confiscated our products, and refused to permit our doing business with 
 neutral countries, while it sold the same kind of goods to these neutrals. 
 In its effort to get control of trade formerly done by Germany it shut us out 
 of South America. When our progressive manufacturers attempted to build 
 up the dye industry it put embargoes on exports to the United States of log¬ 
 wood and barks from Central America—all this through its control of the 
 seas. 
 
 Cotton grown in the Southern States was sold by English middlemen to 
 continental European manufacturers at a lower price than the same cotton 
 could be bought by cotton manufacturers in New England. Of eighteen mil¬ 
 lions’ worth of manufactured cottons imported into Argentina the year before 
 the war, the United States, the greatest producer of raw cotton in the world, 
 sold but $300,000 worth. 
 
 One can not read a daily paper without seeing various items which indicate 
 that England has her finger in every business pie in all corners of the world. 
 
 Further, nothing in the league of nations prevents—in fact, it encourages— 
 the right of England and Japan to prefer each other in their respective colonies 
 and thus automatically to discriminate against the products of the United 
 States. 
 
 Nothing in the league regulates or prevents shipping arrangements to be 
 carried so far as to create lower rates for Japanese and British shipping than 
 for United States commerce. 
 
 ANOTHER BLOW TO AMERICAN TRADE. 
 
 In June, 1916, there was held at Paris an “ economic alliance ” of the Entente 
 Powers, which, while the purposes were disguised, was actually designed to sub¬ 
 stitute a system of trade preferences for the most-favored-nation relation upon 
 which the commercial intercourse of Europe and America rested before the war. 
 
 It was openly stated at this Paris conference that this would operate against 
 the competition of the United States, and carry its commerce below normal 
 equity in world commerce. 
 
 The feeling of the British shipping interest toward the United States was 
 expressed in the following quotation under date of August 10, 1916, from Fair- 
 play, the leading journal devoted to shipping finance in England: 
 
 “America so far has evaded the fight, but she is bound to recognize two 
 things (apart from the fact that we are not out to be beaten) : Firstly, that the 
 nations who win this war, whether they be the Allies or the Central Powers, 
 will not be in a temper to stand any nonsense from any neutrals; that the win¬ 
 ning combatant countries will represent the main armed forces of the world, 
 and that no one else will be in the running. Secondly, America will appreciate 
 that the Allies, pace Mr. Asquith, do intend, where it pays them to do so, to put 
 up a tariff wall between themselves and neutrals. They mean to restore them¬ 
 selves and to become self-supporting—at some expense it may be while the 
 operation lasts, but certainly not for the benefit of neutrals. And if this be so, 
 then America has perhaps a somewhat awkwardly restricted market. She has 
 already experienced the pleasure of a Chinese boycott, but at the close of the 
 war she will be facing as a competitor a Japan which economically, financially, 
 and by treaty is a vastly different proposition from the Nation which could be 
 openly flouted over California issues a few years back.” 
 
 WRITTEN AFTER SECRET PACT WITH JAPAN. 
 
 The fact that this friendly comment was written shortly after the secret 
 treaty between Japan and England was made is so significant that comment is 
 not necessary. 
 
 In January, 1917, at the very time when Balfour and Vivioni were in the 
 United States pleading with President Wilson for American intervention, a 
 
 great convention was being held at Pittsburgh by the United States National 
 
 12 
 
 135549°—1& 
 
932 
 
 TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY 
 
 Foreign Trade Council, at which 1,000 delegates from the largest business 
 concerns in the United States were protesting against the action of the Paris 
 Alliance and devising methods to avert its threatened consequences. 
 
 It is believed by many that the growth in United States exports during the 
 war is a healthy indication of progress and that we are on a firm foreign-trade 
 basis. It is, in fact, quite the contrary, because this increase has been brought 
 about almost wholly by the export of war needs, which substantially ceased 
 with the war. Our trade balance during the war on a peace basis went steadily 
 downward. We gained money during the last five years in our foreign trade, 
 but not business. 
 
 Nothing practical has been done by the United States Government to stabilize 
 our foreign commerce, and the league of nations threatens it with paralysis. 
 
 A most important but little considered factor in British plans is its control 
 of the mechanics of news distribution. Through this power it could and did 
 during the war refuse to neutral nations the right to communicate with each 
 other on their strictly neutral business and personal matters. Before the war 
 merchants in the United States complained repeatedly of interference with 
 their mail and cables. 
 
 SO-CALLED “ LIBERTY ” MEANINGLESS. 
 
 While the world is compelled to get the consent of any one notion to sail the 
 seas or freely to communicate with each other, the liberty for which the war was 
 won is a meaningless word. Under cate of August 8, 1919, the United States 
 Foreign Trade Council announces the appointment of a committee to take up 
 the matter of American systems of cables and wireless. Present conditions are 
 described as “ intolerable.” 
 
 Any nation that, in addition to control of the seas (which Great Britain has 
 under the league) can dominate the world’s food supply of the earth, is double 
 master of the world’s destiny. In 1912 James J. Hill called attention to the 
 progressive diminution in food production of the United States, and looking 
 ahead not for a year, but a generation, there is no question but that the United 
 States and Canada are fast getting in a position where they will not be much 
 more than able to feed themselves. The same conditions apply in South 
 America and Australia. If the peace treaty and league are approved, England, 
 which can not produce within its own island boundaries food enough to supply 
 it for more than two months in the year, is in control of the future food supply 
 of the world. 
 
 When the attempt was made by Cecil Rhodes to reduce the Boer Republic to 
 vassalage to Great Britain, afterwards successful, after one of the most 
 iniquitous wars in the world’s history, he openly declared it his ultimate 
 purpose to paint the map of the world red, and as the first step to run a railroad 
 line from Cairo to the cape. 
 
 The treaty of peace has actually painted Africa red, and it is important for 
 us in this country to know that in Africa there has been turned over to England 
 one of the largest potential food areas left in the world, and American assist¬ 
 ance is also being exerted to place Siberia, the second largest potential unused 
 food-supply area in the world under the control of Great Britain. 
 
 WHEN BRITISH ATTITUDE WILL CHANGE. 
 
 A Great Britain freed from dependence on the food supply of the United 
 States will be a vastly different nation to deal with than a Great Britain which 
 w T ould starve without us. 
 
 Since the war the United States has become the creditor nation of the world. 
 If we gauge correctly the sentiment of the people of this country we are safe 
 in assuming that the tremendous debts due the United States by the rest of 
 the world will not be used as a source of exploitation, coercion, or oppression, 
 but since we are in the dominant financial position by virtue of our national 
 resources, there is no reason why we shall permit injustice to be done the people 
 of our country by allowing British financial manipulation to neutralize this 
 situation adversely to our national interest 
 
 England has a floating debt of twenty-seven billions, eight and a half of 
 which comes due this year. There is a balance in favor of the United States 
 of more than four billions. On the ordinary basis of business England is to-day 
 bankrupt, with Internal, economic conditions making it worse. 
 
TREATY OF PEACE WITH GERMANY. 
 
 933 
 
 There are signs and portents of a secret campaign now beginning, which has 
 for its object the purpose of repudiating not only the interest, but the principal, 
 of the United States war loans. It may be that somehing of this nature must 
 be agreed to by the United States to save the world, but whatever action is 
 taken must not be to restore England’s lost financial leadership, but equally to 
 sustain the credit and economic security of all nations alike. Only a rigid in¬ 
 quiry by the Congress into these questions, and especially as to the process by 
 which the exchange value of the pound sterling is being maintained at what 
 many believe to be an artificial ratio, at the expense of the United States, will 
 enable the people to deal fairly with debtor-nations, and in the real spirit of 
 world peace determine the problems and responsibilities of the position of the 
 United States as a creditor for the world. 
 
 MAY CTX)SE FAR EASTERN “ OPEN DOOR.'* 
 
 Aside from the humiliating betrayal of China, our best friend and most 
 powerful potential partner among the nations, in its sacrifice to the commercial 
 ambition of England’s ally and secret partner, Japan, the people of the United 
 States are vitally concerned in the control of the “ Key to the Orient ” by Japan 
 and England. Hong Kong, the other important entrance to China, is also in 
 control of Great Britain, whose joint control with Japan of Kiaochow will mean 
 the abandonment of the policy of the “ open door ” established as a result of 
 American diplomacy. It will give monopoly to the two principal competitors of 
 the United States to a market of a half billion people. While the principal 
 opposition to the Shantung pact is based on our betrayal of a friend, he commer¬ 
 cial consequences to America of approving any league which shuts it out of the 
 “ open door ” to the Orient merits serious consideration. 
 
 Other items might be added to this protest. The tremendous expansion dur¬ 
 ing the war of the United States merchant marine, on an oil burning basis, 
 frees this country from the dependence on English coaling bases throughout 
 the world, which have been the principal sources of her sea strength. The 
 change of motor power from coal to oil would have given opportunity, under 
 real “ free'dom of the seas,” for the United States to compete on a basis of equal¬ 
 ity. British control of the oil fuel fields in Russia, China and Mexico should be 
 denied and these localities made free for themselves and the world. 
 
 These considerations are presented in the belief that they are American issues 
 vitally connected with the discussion regarding the league of nations, which, as 
 proposed, settles every one of them adversely to the United States. 
 
 If America is true to herself in this crisis, the decision of the United States 
 Senate will transform and purify the politics, policies, and business practices of 
 the whole world. 
 

 fi*, ! 
 
 * 
 
 ♦ 
 
 
 
 | 5 12 072645507 
 
 r*-~ ~ : " 
 
 
 
 : .''ft* 
 
 ■ 
 
 i . -' •'AHS 
 
 • '1 1 
 
 - ^ 
 
 » 'T 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * ; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r. 
 
 
 
 
 
 •» 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i;