« 上一頁繼續 »
is an “illusion ” as well as an injustice. The birds (which are non-game birds), or other "adventurers” are being aided materially migratory non-game birds is prohibited, ex with money and speakers by single-tax asso- cept for scientific or propagating purposes ciations outside the State, such as that founded and, finally, that the international traffic in any by the late Joseph Fels. There is thus an birds or eggs during the continuance of the earnest effort to carry the single tax in Henry close season is likewise prohibited. George's own State. The advocates of the Thus migratory birds are divided into three bill declare that it represents the most vital classes : (1) migratory game birds ; (2) mi issue the people of the State have ever had a gratory insectivorous birds; and (3) other chance to vote on—" whether the land and migratory non-game birds. Where a bird its resources shall continue to be controlled falls in one of the classes of migratory birds by a few speculators and gamblers in human covered by the treaty, it covers not only all necessities and most of them held idle, or individuals of the species which are actually whether they shall be made free and open to migratory, but other individuals of the species all the people on equal terms."
which may reside through the year in the same One result of this campaign will undoubt. State. In other words, the species is declared edly be to arouse interest the country over in by the treaty to be a migratory one, and the the single-tax question. We recommend for failure of certain individual birds to migrate a clear view of the subject a recently pub- does not nullify the protection afforded by lished book by Professor Arthur N. Young, the law. of Princeton, on “ The Single Tax Movement Regarding non-game birds, the treaty in the United States."
recognizes some birds that are neither game
birds nor insectivorous birds—cranes, for inBIRDS
stance. The treaty protects them as much The Protection-of-Migratory-Birds Treaty as it does the migratory game birds and the between the United States and Great Britain insectivorous birds. The non-migratory birds which was negotiated last spring was approved are the ones left as plunder for the hunter. by the Senate just before the adjournment Their status depends upon State laws, and if of Congress and ratified by the President. the State laws do not protect them they will The exchange of ratifications awaits the action not be protected. Fortunately, they are few of the British Government.
in number, and consist chiefly of grouse, In general the treaty provides for the pro- quail, woodpeckers, hawks, and owls. It is tection of birds in the United States and in feared that non-migratory game birds are Canada. In particular the treaty provides that going to be wiped out completely at an early no bird important to agriculture because it is date in all localities wherein they are not an insect destroyer shall be shot at any time; given five-year close seasons to enable them that the close season on migratory game birds to recuperate. shall be between March 10 and September Be this as it may, the result of this treaty 1, except that the close season for shore must benefit the birds, the real sportsmen. birds shall be between February 1 and and the public. August 15; that the season for hunting may In the first place, the treaty saves from be further restricted to such period, not ex- depletion and threatened annihilation over a ceeding three months and a half, as the con- thousand species of waterfowl, insectivorous tracting Powers may deem appropriate ; that and game birds which migrate across our for the protection of special birds there shall country twice each year. be, in the first place, for wood duck and eider Secondly, the real sportsmen among our duck either a close season extendirg over a more than five million sportsmen will welcome period of at least five years, or refuges shall the fairer opportunity to the birds, the spring be established for them, while, in the second shooting being now eliminated when migraplace, for band-tailed pigeons, little brown, tory birds are flying towards their nesting sandhill, and whooping cranes, for swans, grounds. curlews, and almost all shore birds (plover, Finally, all men will take pride in the snipe, and woodcock being exempted), there guaranty, not only to the present generation is to be a continuous close season for ten of a reasonable supply of migratory wild life, years; that the taking of nests or eggs of but to future generations of their rightful migratory game or migratory insectivorous heritage.
THE NATION'S TWO PATHS complications arose with other nations over THE LINE OF DUTY AND THE
the spilling of blood, advocated a course of
stopping all revolution. The line of least LINE OF LEAST RESISTANCE
resistance in Mexico led, on the one side, to Many Americans are wondering what is the cordial approval of Villa, and then, even the real issue in this campaign. Their minds when Villa was compliant, to the other exare confused. Political principles seem ob- treme of co-operating with Carranza against scured by a multitude of unrelated questions. Villa. To-day the line of least resistance The Presidential campaign seems to some to has led the Administration to a recognition consist merely in a contest between two men, of the Carranza Government as a sovereign and the question at issue which of the two government, and at the same time to the men the individual voter personally prefers; occupation of Mexican territory on the ground to others, the chief issue seems to be the that the Carranza Government is not sover-Eight-Hour Law; to others, the chance of eign. our embroilment in the world war; to others, With reference to Colombia, the line of Preparedness; to still others, the tariff ques- least resistance has involved the verbal advotion; and to a very large number, our policy cacy of paying Colombia twenty-five million toward Mexico. In addition, there are other dollars in alleged damages, and the failure to issues tending to complicate the situation-the press that proposition in the face of hostile issue of the Philippines, of Colombia, of the opinion. merit system in the civil service, of our rela- In our relations with the Philippines the tions to Japan, and so on almost without line of least resistance has led to a policy of limit.
inviting the Filipinos to expect immediate Not one of these is the real question which independence, and then denying it to them. the country is to decide on November 7. When a railway strike threatened the Rather, all of these are parts of the one great Nation, the Administration did not ask, What question—Which path shall the country follow is the right thing to do? but it waited and for the next four years ? Shall it be the waited until the crisis became alarming, and path along the line of least resistance, or shall then, following the line of least resistance, it be the path along the line of duty ?
did the one thing it believed imperative in The present Administration under Presi- order to avoid calamity. dent Wilson has followed the line of least And in all the questions raised by the war resistance.
in Europe the line of least resistance has In the matter of Preparedness, the line of meant vigorous and even bellicose words unleast resistance has meant a swinging from supported by acts. one extreme of opposition to the movement In behalf of this policy the argument has for National security to the other extreme of been set forth that by pursuing it the Presiadvocating the "greatest navy in the world.” dent has “kept us out of war," has “kept
When the Japanese question was raised, us out of Mexico," has averted a great strike, the Administration did not ask, What is the has provided peace and prosperity, has put duty of this country toward its own citizens “safety first”-has, in short, on all these and toward Japan ? but, rather, sent the points enabled the United States to avoid Secretary of State to try to smooth things trouble. out so that there would be no trouble.
To this policy there is only one true alterWhen the Panama tolls question was raised, native. Instead of the line of least resistance, the President did not lay before Congress a the Nation in all these cases might have folpolicy of right and of responsibility, but told lowed the line of duty. And the question Congress that unless the tolls law was re- before the country is whether it shall continue pealed he would face a situation so delicate to follow the line of least resistance or shall that he did not know what would happen. undertake in every new question, or every
When the Mexican difficulty confronted recurrence of an old question, to determine the Administration, there was no facing of what is the line of duty, and then to underthe duty of protecting Americans in Mexico, take to follow it, no matter what the resistbut rather the adoption of a policy of “ watch- ance. ful waiting.” To avoid trouble, the Admin- It has been often asked, What would istration first advocated that the Mexicans President Wilson's opponents have done in spill all the blood they chose, and then, when his stead? That question it is impossible for
any one to answer. But it is possible to say order to determine its policy according to the what purpose might have been pursued in duty that a strong nation owes to the weak and place of the purpose openly avowed by the a member of the family of nations owes to the supporters of the Administration.
public law of nations and to world civilization. In the next four years the country can on On the whole, President Wilson represents all these questions have, not the purpose of the policy of following the line of least resistsafety, of ease, of present comfort, of the ance. On the whole, Mr. Hughes repreavoidance of immediate trouble, but instead sents a policy of following the line of duty. the purpose of duty, of honor, of obligation. We wish that Mr. Hughes in his campaign
It can deal with the question of Prepared- had made it clearer than he has, both by his ness by asking what the duty of the Nation's words and by his general course, that no conGovernment is in securing the safety of its sideration of safety, of policy, of political citizens.
benefit, should stand in the way of moral In our relations with Japan the Nation conviction. But Mr. Hughes's record is not can ask what its duty is toward a friendly merely that which he has made in the camand ambitious Power that is consonant with paign, but also that which he has made as its duty toward the preservation of this Governor and as Justice. And in that record Nation's integrity and character.
there is evidence that Mr. Hughes was unIf ever the question of tolls on the Panama swerving in any course determined by obliCanal arises again, the Nation can decide gation and public duty. His candidacy rep that question with a view to the purpose of resents the only alternative to the candidacy justice, both toward its own citizens and of the President, whose course has been detoward the people of other nations who use fended, not on the ground that it has been the Canal.
right, but on the ground that it has been safe. In the continuing Mexican problem it can It is between these two lines—the line of determine its policy by the purpose of pro- least resistance and the line of duty—that the tecting the lives and the property of its citi- country must decide. zens there, and of fulfilling the Nation's obligation toward other nations which have allowed it to assume responsibility for civi
THE GERMAN SUBMARINE lized conditions in its neighborhood.
When the Colombia question comes up. AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE the Nation can decide that question in the Americans have no reason to be surprised light of its duty; and if it decides that it at the transfer of submarine warfare to the ought to pay the money it will insist upon waters near the coast of the United States. paying it, and if it decides that the demand The German Government has said nothing for the payment of the money is blackmail and the American Government has done it will definitely and unequivocally refuse to nothing to lead Americans to believe their pay.
coastal waters immune from such outrages as In the matter of the Philippines this the German submarines have committed on Nation can decline to play fast and loose the other side of the Atlantic. In sinking with the dreams of the Filipinos, and can merchant vessels in the neighborhood of Nandefinitely adapt its policy to a purpose of tucket and leaving their crews and, in more fulfilling its own treaty obligations, protecting than one instance, passengers, including wo the Filipinos from foreign complications, and men and children, adrift in small boats on the assuring to its own citizens the maintenance open sea, Germany has simply continued in our of their rights established through the past neighborhood her familiar piratical methods. eighteen years.
If the Teutonic submarine officers in these When labor questions arise involving the recent instances have not been as ruthless as National function, the Nation can face each they or others have been in such cases as question promptly and settle it according, not that of the Lusitania and the Arabic and the to the immediate consideration of safety, but Ancona, it does not follow that they observed to the rights of both parties to the controversy either the laws of warfare or the principles of and the rights of the public.
humanity. And in the continuing questions or the If a British cruiser at the opening of the new issues raised by the war the Nation can war-before there had been any submarine set aside considerations merely of comfort in torpedoings-had held up a neutral steam
ship (or even a German steamship), had given' dent Wilson told the German Government the occupants of the steamship fifteen min that “the repetition by the commanders of utes to get out into their boats in the open German naval vessels of acts in contravention sea, and then had sunk the vessel, this coun- of these rights must be regarded by the Govtry would have been aflame with indignation. ernment of the United States, when they affect
The American people at that time had not American citizens, as deliberately unfriendly." been taking counsel of their fears long enough. It is also well to remember that at the to make them cautious in expressing their beginning President Wilson declared subanger, nor had they become so familiar with marine warfare on merchantmen necessarily the cold blooded murder of non-combatants illegal, and repeated that declaration in the after the German method that anything less following words last April : brutal seemed actually legal and humane. The Government of the United States has Now, however, if a submarine captain does been very patient. ... It has become painfully not repeat the crime of the Lusitania, Amer evident to it that the position which it took at icans are disposed to be thankful. We have the very outset is inevitable-namely, the use of to remind ourselves that, according to all the submarines for the destruction of an enemy's practices of civilized nations heretofore, and commerce is of necessity, because of the very also according to the dictates of common
character of the vessels employed and the very decency, a merchant vessel is entitled to be
methods of attack which their employment of visited and searched by a belligerent naval
course involves, utterly incompatible with the
principles of humanity, the long-established vessel before the question can be even raised
and incontrovertible rights of neutrals, and the whether she is liable to capture as a prize;
sacred immunities of non-combatants, that even then only special exigencies justify the war-vessel in sinking her; and then only All these words have amounted to nothing. after the ship's papers and all her passengers They have made the written record of the and crew are insured protection and safety. United States fairly correct, but the outrages
By our Government's inability or disincli- which they properly describe and condemn nation to take any action putting a stop to they have done nothing to prevent. these practices in the interest of our common With the appearance of this submarine civilization we have become accustomed to warfare in American waters no new question seeing the practices of piracy adopted as part of law or of morals arises, but there does of the naval policy of Germany and as a arise a new sense of danger, and, we hope, regular feature of German submarine war in the minds of most Americans a new sense fare. Fortunately, in these recent instances of responsibility. American naval vessels were close at hand If German submarines are going to ply and picked up from open boats on the high their nefarious trade near American ports seas American women and children as well with any degree of effectiveness, they will be as American men whom the German subma- practically—even if not technically—blockrine commander had made castaways. This ading our ports ; they will be menacing our fact, however, does not lessen the nature of coastwise traffic, for no vessel can enter a the crime or modify in any degree the fact zone infested by submarines without running that by what this German commander did into danger; they will be inviting reprisals non-combatant lives, including the lives of by the Allied cruisers which may conceivably American citizens, were put in jeopardy. In be directed by mistake against our own subthe light of that fact, it is well to remember marines; they will be necessarily dependent that President Wilson notified Germany that upon supplies which can be only obtained he would hold her to a “ strict accountability” either from bases near our shores or from for such acts, and would " take any steps it accomplices in the United States in either might be necessary to take ... to secure to case trespassing upon American forbearance; American citizens the full accomplishment of they will be adding a new affront to the their acknowledged rights on the high seas;" United States by making more open and that President Wilson told Germany that only obvious than ever the cool German disregard resistance or attempted flight on the part of of American protests. a merchantman could be regarded as any There is no way to know at present justification for the commander of a sub- whether Germany's purpose in doing this is marine “ for so much as putting the lives of merely to raise the spirits of the German those on board in jeopardy ;” and that Presi- people at a time when the fortunes of the
war are evidently going against them ; or to make a real effort by a renewal of her most ruthless methods to impair the British prestige at sea and cut off in a measure British supplies ; or to take a position from which she can recede at a price which the United States will be called upon to pay by some new humiliation.
Whatever Germany's purpose may be, the real question with the American people is whether this country is too feeble or too inert to offer any actual and effectual resistance; and, if it is too feeble and too inert, whether this people will rouse themselves to secure a government strong enough and active enough to make resistance, in the name and for the sake, not only of the American people, but of civilization.
SHALL WE ABOLISH THE
The article on another page entitled “A Function of State" is not agreeable reading. But it is profitable reading. For the citizens of a democratic state never ought to forget that they are responsible for whatever is done in their name and by their authority. The condemned were executed in the name and by the authority of the people of the State of New York. "The people are therefore responsible for the execution. We accept our share of that responsibility, and present to our readers our understanding of the question which that responsibility inevitably raises.
We do not agree with the statement which Mr. White quotes from Mr. Osborne, that the taking of human life is always a sin. The state has a right to do what ever is necessary to protect the lives and property of its citizens. This is not only its right, but its duty; and this duty is to be performed, however painful it may be to tender hearts. If a mob attacks peaceful citizens traveling in a train or a trolley car, it is the duty of the police to disperse the mob and protect the citizens, and, if necessary for this purpose, to shoo*, and shoot to kill. If Mexican raiders invade Texas, destroy property, and kill American citizens, it is the duty of the Nation to send soldiers to protect the citizens, and, if necessary, to shoot and kill the assailants. The fact that the loval policeman or the loyal soldier hazards his life does not make this any less a duty. If it is right to hazard the
life of a loyal guardian to protect the lives of citizens, it is not wrong to take the life of a condemned murderer if peaceable citizens cannot otherwise be adequately protected
Is capital punishment necessary for the protection of peaceful citizens? If necessary capital punishment is right. If not neces sary, capital punishment is wrong.
The incidents which our correspondent gives of murders perpetrated by gunmen notwithstanding the execution of Becker demonstrate that capital punishment is not a complete protection of peaceful citizens. They do not demonstrate that capital punishment is not necessary for that protection. The execution of Becker has not put an end to murder. No one supposed it would. But there is good reason to believe that his execution has effectively aided the Police Commissioner in putting into the police of New York City a new spirit and making of it a new force.
This it has not done by the deterrent power of fear. The execution of Becker revealed in the generally apathetic people of New York a stern resolve that an officer appointed to protect citizens should not use his power to murder citizens and go unpunished. It appealed not merely, not mainly, to fear ; it appealed to the conscience. It was more effectual in awakening in certain classes, perhaps in all classes, an indignation against certain forms of wrong-doing than either sermons or editorials ever could have awakened. It compelled them to perceive the baseness of an act and of a moral attitude which before they had not thought of as base. It spoke louder than words. The value of capital punishment lies in the fact that it is the deliberate judgment of the community that man may commit a crime so monstrous that he is no longer worthy to live.
The precept, “ Abhor that which is evil, ** appeals to the universal conscience. All manly men do abhor that which they see to be evil. That abhorrence will and must find some expression proportioned to the public estimate of the crime committed. When a mob hangs a man guilty of criminal asSault upon a woman, the wrath which inspires them is evil, because it is an unregulated and uncontrolled wrath. But it indicates a moral sense superior to apathy and indifference. Mobs execute capital punishment because they can act promptly. while the courts act sluggishly or not at all.