The New York Times/1918/11/11/Letters
'Community' Peace Celebrations.
To the Editor of The New York Times:
By this time the least optimistic must be convinced that peace is near at hand. Without doubt the conclusion of the greatest war in human history—a conclusion which is likely to be reasonable satisfactory to the American people—will be welcomed by nation-wide celebrations of victory. It should not be regarded as premature to suggest that these celebrations be community affairs rather than the getting together in large centres of population. We have gained our victories because every one has helped, and one of the finest things about the entire situation has been the manifest purpose of the smallest communities to do their share. When the proper time comes let us have a celebration in every city, village, hamlet, and plantation in the United States. Where the population is only a few hundred or a few score it would afford a lesson in patriotism never to be forgotten if the community should get together for such a purpose.
Citizens would not be lacking who could speak of the origin and development of the war, and the thoroughly unselfish part our country has played in it. Let us have a nation-wide celebration in which no community shall be lacking.
University of Maine, Orono, Nov. 8, 1918.
Robert J. Collier.
To the Editor of The New York Times.
Some ten or more years ago the American weekly reached its height of artistic excellence, and Robert Collier was the first one to foresee that the old illustrations of the olden days were not in keeping with the modern spirit. Young and enthusiastic, Mr. Collier with rare intelligence gathered about him the best painters and draftsmen of America. His high-spirited enthusiasm helped them to produce the most brilliant artistic pages in the history of American weekly journalism. Robert Collier fought for high ideals, good art, good reproductoins, and better printing. He championed the fine arts and not commercialism. The American artists owe him a lot. Proudly they lay a wreath at his bier.
New York, Nov. 9, 1918.
VICTIMS OF THE "BULGARIAN FURY."
The Greek Minister Denies That That Country is "American-Made" or Anything Short of Barbarian.
To the Editor of The New York Times:
On Oct. 26 William G. Shepherd published in several newspapers a curious letter containing some strangely paradoxical statements concerning the Bulgars. For instance: "It is Bibles, not bullets, that have whipped Bulgaria." "As soon as the United States declared war on Germany the people of Bulgaria realized that they themselves were on the wrong side, and from that time on the doom of King Ferdinand was sealed." "Bulgaria is an American-made nation," &c.
No one, of course, can prevent Mr. Shepherd from giving free scope to his imagination, but would it not be better if he would kingly put some restraint upon his utterances? The phrase last mentioned, "An American-made nation," would lead one to conclude that he entertains but a very poor opinion of Americanization, since, if Bulgaria is really American-made, the actions of her citizens do not rebound to the credit of her alleged creator—the United States.
Anything more appalling than the cruelty and bloodthirstiness displayed by the Bulgars throughout the war cannot well be conceived. Indeed, according to dispatches received from Saioniki, the English officers who were prisoners of war in Bulgaria until the recent cessation of hostilities deposed before the British authorities immediately upon their arrival in that city that they had personally witnessed almost unbelievable atrocities perpetrated by the Bulgars upon the persons of Serbs, Rumanians, and Greeks imprisoned or deported by them. Greek bishops were hung by the feet, head downward, above braziers of flame. Serbian parents were nailed to posts while their daughters were handed over to the soldiery and publicly defiled. Mutilations of the most revolting character and all manner of tortures, including eventration, are among the "details" contained in the reports of these honest officers, who were powerless to interfere or even to plead with the torturers at work on their pleasurable and varied undertakings.
A delegation of the Red Cross Convention of Geneva that has just returned from Eastern Macedonia has also brought back heartrending reports of the devastations of the "Furia Bulgarica." Villages were burned to the ground after being ruthlessly pillaged of every vestige of foodstuff, growing crops in the surrounding fields and gardens were wantonly destroyed, cattle were carried off or else uselessly slaughtered, and the wretched owners were left to starve where they once lived in comfort and plenty. As a matter of fact, if help is not procured at once for these unfortunates, shelter, food, clothing, and medical assistance—for pestilence has followed in the track of famine—the complete extermination of whole populations, so efficiently planned and confidently expected by the Bulgars, will shortly be accomplished.
How in the face of these facts it is possible to express the opinion that the American spirit is the inspiring power among the Bulgars and that it is "Bibles, not bullets, that have conquered" these savage hordes must remain a mystery between Mr. Shepherd and his Maker! The splendid influence exercised by the United States in Cuba and the Philippines superabundantly proves that Mr. Shepherd's assertions go for nothing at all and are likely only to do much hard to those who are ignorant of the real question under discussion.
It would be better to admit that the missionaries sent by the United States to uplift Bulgaria found that this undertaking was far beyond any human strength and skill. Her sluggish atmosphere is refractory to any wind of civilization, and it is idle to pretend that today, though defeated and disarmed, her people are other than the fierce barbarians they always have been. As the Turk found them so the Turk left them!
Equally false is the declaration that Bulgaria changed her politics as soon as the United States entered the field in 1917. She has just surrendered to overwhelming force, after having lost, besides thousands upon thousands of killed and wounded, 90,000 prisoners and 2,000 cannon. She never, until compelled to do so, altered her political aims nor abated one single item of her Teutonic program of loot at any time since she joined forces with the Huns.
Because she has benefited so greatly by the American missions and has become so conversant with the American Bible, (a book, by the way, that has about as wide a circulation within her borders as a snowflake in the infernal regions,) Bulgaria is to be relieved from all the blame of her evil courses. That blame is to rest solely upon King Ferdinand and not at all upon his gentle and delicate-minded subjects. Does Mr. Shepherd realize that, until his projects resulted in utter defeat, the entire Bulgar nation stood solidly behind their King, and without one dissenting voice from press or people—save only and excepting the silent voice of M. Panaretoff, the Bulgar envoy to the United States, who appears from his own statements to have supported the sordid and treacherous schemes of his sovereign, though hoping all the while in his innermost heart that they would miscarry?
The Bulgar is sick, so the Bulgar a monk would be! His case is so bad that he and his friends would fain beguile the good sense of the American people by flattering their religious predilections and fulsomely praising the work of the American missionaries. Can they not pursue their propaganda with a trifle more dignity and a little more regard for the truth?
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Greece to the United States.
Nov. 5, 1918.
A WORKABLE LEAGUE.
The Present Allied Powers to Organize it.
To the Editor of The New York Times:
It has been said that there is no clock which strikes the passing of historic eras, but not many of us will accept that view after peace has been made with Germany on the Allies' terms. That will mark a greater change than did the capture of Constantinople in 1453, for it will mean nothing less than the end of attempts to create another world empire, the end of autocratic government and the beginning of an age of security for free States, great and small. The clock of the eras is striking loudly, and should announce one thing more—a mighty league of nations as a present fact.
With a reign of terror in Russia, with disturbance elsewhere and with the task of drawing new national boundaries on its hands, the world will not lack grave problems, but the greatest of them all is whether it will have a league of nations that can preserve the peace which the war has won. This league is usually thought of as a great new human institution that has been dreamed of for centuries with small hope of being realized. We now hope that we may soon be able to create it, but we still think of it as a thing of the future almost too great and good to be gained. If we have already worked for it, this is because it is so supremely important that we ought to lavish time and labor on it, though there were not one chance in twenty of success.
This whole attitude seems strangely wrong. We have realized the dream of the ages and do not know it. Events have given us our league and the problem is whether we shall keep it. We may easily let it slip away, although the chance of keeping it is worth infinitely more than that of forming any new union. The present league is supremely good, vast, and firmly united. The Entente—meaning the union of nations fighting Germany—is far greater and better than anything that a single one of us would have dared to hope for a few years ago. Most of the population of the world is now in it and, if we could be sure that it would never break, the peace of the world would be assured. The "balance of power" in the world would have taken a very simple form—on the one hand a great combination devoted to peace and, on the other, detached nations too few to think of opposing the peace-loving combination. To let the close bonds which now unite the Allies become weakened and the combination dissolve would be the most criminal blunder that statesmanship is capable of committing.
The weakest of possible leagues would be one composed of elements that repel each other as do French and Germans, Italians and Austrians. There is small doubt that the war will end leaving the German Empire incapable of being at once combined in an intimate league whose members must trust each other. It may be brought into a combination of some sort that will serve a good purpose during an interregnum and that may conceivably ripen later into a closer league, but according to all appearances a goodly number of years will be required for the ripening. The Entente nations cannot today afford to form a league with their present enemies, except under the same conditions that are necessary for an armistice—the Entente must keep its preponderance of power. Until it can trust Germany it can make only such a compact with her as enemies make when both of them wish to stop fighting. All the belligerents might join in adopting a plan for arbitration and a world court, and this provisional measure might help to keep the peace for a score or two of years. The hatred of Germany for her savagery and the distrust excited by her treachery might gradually disappear, provided the wrongs and the treachery were not repeated. To go further now and establish many common institutions—to try to direct the commerce, industry and finance of all the warring countries in a friendly, live-and-let-live way—would be a crowning achievement indeed, but it would absolutely demand a reform of Germany that would reach her heart and life as no formal change of her imperial constitution will do. She must become just, human, trustworthy and more than formally democratic.
Democratizing Prussia may do more than democratizing the empire, but both of these together would fall short of the change that is needed to make Germany a fit member of a brotherhood of nations—a close union cemented by confidence and good-will. WE have that now without Germany. Not till she has passed through a period of probation will it be safe to have her in our family. If democracy shall gradually cause conquering ambition to disappear, the situation will be radically changed and there will be a place in the intimate circle for Germany; but we need positive evidence that it has so disappeared before trusting her. A sham repentance and temporary changes in her Government would be quite in her recent line. It would be dealing recklessly with the future of the entire world to stake lives and fortunes of nations on any unproved assumption as to what the changes now in progress will do. When humanity embarks in one ship of State it must know what materials it is made of. There must be proof that its keel was well laid, its "ribs of steel" well wrought. If we know that a part of the material already "made in Germany" is full of flaws, our course is clear—we must wait till she can give us something better. We must wait till democracy has done its work and not stake our fortunes on the chance that it will do it.
The Entente is not as yet a treaty-made union. England was not bound by a formal compact with France or Russia to go into the war, still less was America so bound, and Italy had a defensive alliance with the common enemy of these three countries, from which she was quickly absolved by the open aggressions of the Central Powers. Nearly a score of nations that have fought shoulder to shoulder are held together by something deeper and stronger than a formal bargain, namely, a common sense of justice, common interests and great peril impending over them all. United by these ties they have become a brotherhood in arms and have fought for and won the freedom of the world. To break up their union would be to risk—probably to sacrifice—what they have shed their blood to gain, namely, peace and freedom for States great and small. No treaty that could today be made with Germany could create such a union as the Entente is, though it were fortified by as many scraps of paper as there are people in the empire.
There is no measure the value to the world of the union that has evolved through the war or the calamity that would follow a breaking or weakening of the bonds that hold it together. The problems of peace will at best be difficult enough to test any league and, in advance of their appearance, we have golden moments in which to consolidate the Entente and develop its power. Ultimately we shall need Germany in the league, and immediately we should make treaties of arbitration with her. That will put her in the vestibule of the home of fraternal nations. Good friends, questionable friends and enemies may go as far as that, but only a clear proof of a change of heart can make the present Prussia or the empire that she rules a safe member of the family about the hearth. the priceless opportunity that is now with us and will not long wait is the opportunity so to strengthen the league of nations that has won a war for freedom as to fit it for meeting all coming dangers. What was has joined together let not peace put asunder.
New York, Nov. 9, 1918.