Newspaper Page Text
EDITORIAL PAGE
THE ATLANTA GEORGIAN
Published Every Afternoon Except Sunday
By THE GEORGIAN COMPANY
At 20 East Alabama St., Atlanta, Ga.
Entered as second-class matter at postoffiee at Atlanta, under act of March 3, 1375.
Subscription Price—Delivered by carrier, 10 cents a week. By mail, $5 00 a year.
Payable in advance.
England Now Insists JUpon
Denying Our Rights
The Loudon Times says that it is the business of the Hearst
newspapers to attack British ideas. The London Times refers to our
contentions as to American rights in the Panama canal, and our op
position to the British theory that we have no right, as the nation
building and owning the Panama canal, to give American ships any
preferential rights whatsoever in its use.
The Times and several other English journals suggest that
congress, in voting to give EHEE TOLLS ONLY TO Ol R ( OAST
WISE VESSELS, and President Taft, in signing the bill, weakly
yielded to political sentiments expressed by the Hearst newspapers,
public men finding such sentiments “difficult to resist in presiden
tial years." The London Tinies says that an appeal will be made to
The Hague tribunal if the I'nited States persists in ignoring its
treaty obligations. This prophecy has been fulfilled. The British
government lias given official notice of such appeal.
It is now plain that the British government’s conception of the
moaning of the Hay Pauncelote treaty was entirely different from
the conception of the American diplomatists who negotiated it and
of the senators who ratified it
No one will believe that an American president and senate so
far forgot the Monroe Doctrine as to permit Great Britain to say
that the I nited Slates could not build an interoceanie canal on its
own continent in its own domestic territory and at its own expense
without first securing the approval of Great Britain and guarantee
ing that American ships of commerce and of war should never have
any preferential rights or privileges in that canal. Senator Lodge,
chairman of the foreign relations committee of the senate that re
ported the treaty, is our authority for this statement.
The Georgian is one of those that believe that treaty obligations,
• when authoritatively ascertained, should be scrupulously observed
as long as the treaty is in force.
But we do not believe that the British interpretation of the
treaty is the correct one, or that Great Britain will gain anything in
the long run by an appeal to The Hague for arbitration.
We believe that if this treaty is found to stand in the Way of
absolute control by this government of its own domestic possessions,
without dictation by any foreign power, the treaty itself will have
to go by the bo»rd.
Solving the High Cost of
Living
The newest, as well as the oldest, solution for the high cost of
living problem is the bankruptcy court. A New York lawyer, it is
announced, lias applied this remedy to bis domestic problems, and
the result is that he is supremely satisfied. The list of his debts
shows that he owes everybody at about the proper ratio; that is,
be owes the butcher more than he owes the druggist, and the laun
dress more than he owes the tailor. On its surface bis accounting
shows that his income did not keep up with his expenses, and that
fie simply declined to cut his style of housekeeping.
Briefly, that is exactly the box that many of us’are in. Those
who have not bad a substantial increase of income during the last
five or six years now find that their margin of savings is swept
away, or. if they were living up to their income, they now find
themselves hopelessly in debt. Too many are looking toward an in
crease of income to solve their problem instead of trying to reduce
expenses. A man committed suicide the.other day rather than live
in a n:.■re modest manner than he was accustomed to.
I'ntil tin* solution of the problem of high prices is found the
average citizen must prune and prune his outgo, even though his
income increases. Otherwise the bankruptcy courts will work
overtime.
Women Say They Are
Noting at Forty
At what age does a woman cease to be young.' This is no gibe
at the softer sex. but is a plain business question prompted by an
uouucements of Hie Young Woman's Christian Association. The
western branch of that worthy institution has set twenty-five years
as the limit of youth for women, and has declared that after that
age women should he able to take can* of themselves. But the
ladies of Passaic. New .Jersey. have other thoughts upon the subject.
Miss Smith. tlm president of the local branch, has declared that the
limit of youth for a woman is a movable feast. There is no age
limit, says Mis* Smith, but ns a rule a woman of forty ‘’ought, in
the ordinary course of events, to be able to take care of herself.”
She is still young at that immature age and may need help and pro
tection for a few years longer. Os course, says Miss Smith in effect,
a girl of forty will be protected by the 'I . W. ('. A. until such time
as she grows up.
We have merely quoted the testimony of woman herself on
this question, for far he it from the duty of any masculine editor
to tackle such a fearsome and serious subject as this.
Dreams and Their Value
Every dream, especially every day dream, has its value. 'Pile
gigantic enterprises that now cover the land had their beginnings
in dreams of one kind or another. Eulton dreamed the transatlantic
liner into existence, and Morse dreamed the telegraph. Bell dreamed
of sending his voice through a wire tor thousands of miles, and the
Wrights dreamed of conquering the air. The great achievements
of the earth were originally stuff that dreams are made of and noth
ing more.
So when you see your boy day-dreaming on the grass or at the
window, do not check him. Let him send his little mind out into
the future ami some day from the weird dream he may create a
lever to move the world-
The Atlanta Georgian
FRIDAY. SEPTEMBER 6, 1912.
JUST LISTENING
Drawn by TAD.
■
1 ■ 1 !■—■■■—■ I ■ ■■ " ■— ■■■ ■— 'I - ... ■ -
■
I
,
-L- ( No ° ** , .°'*' € SAYS
! 6ILL ~ fc ' 5Av5 ' fc !
r H-fcr cai/au‘6 boat i
H / s ¥ 1 Amc * good MiHO
jhl® IJI
I
:: PROTECTING A HUSBAND : :
A MISSOURI judge has deinand-
AA <-d to konw of a woman,
whose husband was lost,
strayed or stolen, why she didn’t
take better earc of him
As Mr. Webber would say, "That
listens good,” but in the aefnal
practice how is a wife to take care
of a husband? How to pro
tect him against himself and other
women'.’ By what means can she
build a fence so high and tight
around the domestic fold that it will
prevent a roving man from jumping
over tiie bars or sneaking out un
der the gate or being abducted by
some husband snatcher?
A great many thousands of anx
ious women would like some au
thentic information on this subject,
and it is to be devoutly hoped that
the judge who thinks that a wife is
to blame for her husband’s side
stepping will furnish a reliable reci
pe for preventing this disaster.
A great many plausible formulas
looking to the same end have been
handed out to women from time to
time, but each one has had the fatal
defect that while it was lovely as a
theory it was utterly impracticable
as a working proposition.
Women have been told, for in
stance, that In order to retain their
husbands’ love they keep
themselves young and slim, and
straight-fronted, and as good-look
ing at fifty as they were at twenty.
Accepting this idiotic idea as true,
tens of thousands of noble and de
voted wives have endured, and are
enduring todaj. the torture of the
Inquisition,
Not Fools.
Half of tiie fat. middle-aged
women you know are putting them
selves through horrible exercises
am! starving themselves into nerv
ous prostration, and being pum
melled into a Jelly by masseurs,
and flayed alive by beauty doctors,
in order to keep dow n their waist
measures and hang on to the last
shied of their complexions in the
fond belief that by keeping a sem
blance of youth and beauty, after
youth and beauty are gone, they
will keep their husbands fascinated.
What nonsense! Husbands are
not fools. Neither are they blind.
No man thinks that his middle
aged, fat. gray-headed wife Is as
beautiful as Miss Peacherino. If he
still loves her. and she's the one
woman in the world to him when
she is fifty, it is not because of
her looks, but in spite of them. He
loves her for something a million
times more potent than beauty.
No. \on can't protect a husband
against stray ing from his ow n fire
side by doing tin- living picture act
yuurselt, because there will always
By DOROTHY DIX.
be younger and fairer ladies abroad
than you are. So if there's one
place in the world more than an
other where love's labor is lost it
is where a woman makes a martyr
of herself try ing to keep y oung and
beautiful in order to take care of
iter husband. ,
Again, wives have been told that
1 JT I
wA Zri
MU zy
m A/
gjjjfo-:
DOROTHY DIX
the way to keep their husbands was
to give them at heme the pleasures
they sought abroad. Considering
that the gregarious husband goes
in search of saloons and barroom
company and little games of poker
and the society of chorus girls, this
piece of advice is somewhat diffi
cult to follow.
The atmosphere of the home is
one of pink tea, and not the car
mine beloved of those who paint
things red, and it is doubtful if any
respectable wife, however devoted,
could successfully run a home that
would be a good understudy of a
bar or a lobster palace. Nor w ould
her husband patronize the place if
she did. If you will observe you
1 will notice that the men who are
the gayest and noisiest abroad are
always the quietest at home, and
this is why wife is never a success
as a chaperon. She may be a great
Httle protector for husband when
she gets the chance, but she doesn't
get the chance any ot'tener than he
can help it.
Still another theory that has been
advanced for keeping husbands
from straying into forbidden pas
tures is for wives to turn them
selves into an entertainment com
mittee and keep their husbands so
amused of an evening that they will
never desire to seek outside recrea
tion. This looks like a helpful hint
t’> mother until she tries it; but
say, suffering sisters, have you ever
attempted to play a two-handed
game of cards with your husband?
Or read aloud to him? Or play
some of the music for him that you
used to play before you were mar
ried? Or to discuss politics, or the
stock market, or baseball, or some
thing that you think he's interested
in with him?
You have? Then I need say no
more. You will never forget the
things he said, nor what you an
swered back, nor how you ended
the evening, both so mad you
. wouldn’t speak. There may be men
meek enough of spirit to suffer
themselves to be deliberately enter
tained by their wives, but if there
are, they are so entirely and com
pletley married that their wives
can’t lose them, and nobody need
worry about keeping them nailed
to the hearthstone.
All of this does not tell how a
woman is to take care of her hus
band as the Missouri judge indi
cates she must do. That's a conun
drum nobody has answered. She
can’t always be young and beauti
ful. for she must grow old and ugly
with time. She can’t always be
gay and entertaining, because she
must undergo the work and worry
and sorrow of life.
She can't keep her husband from
seeing more attractive women than
she is. because she can’t put blind
ers on him, and-the woods are full
of fascinators. She can't watch him
all the time, because men and wom
en go different ways about their
daily affairs.
A Puzzle.
The woman who thinks she pro
tects her husband from the charms
of other women by keeping a sus
picious eye upon him and having
jealous fits every time he shows or
dinary politeness to another woman
makes the mistake of her life. So
does the woman who spies upon her
husband and goes through his
pockets to see if he has any letters
in feminine handwriting. So also
does the wife who drives with too
tight a rein.
To watch anybody puts a pre
mium upon deceit, and the last way
in the world to make a man, faith
ful is for his wife to try to holtl
him on the leash as she would a pet
dog. He would be more than mor
tal if that did not make him slip
the collar now and then.
How then is a wife to protect a
husband? The answer is, she can't.
All that she can do is to be a good
wife, which includes being a pleas
ant and agreeable individual with
whom to live. Then all the rest is
up to the man, and it's unfair to
blame his wife for his shortcom
ings.
THE HOME PAPER
W. R. Hearst on Canal Rights
Domestic Possession of U. S.
Hague Biased; Nations Envy
•r
r. r *
“Impropriety of Submitting a Matter So Intimately Involving
American Interests to Foreign Arbitration is Evident.”
Special Cable to The Atlanta Georgian
LONDON, Sept. 6. —To submit
the rights of the United States in
the Panama canal to arbitration at
The Hague tribunal is to submit a
question of vital importance to the
United States to the representa
tives of nations whose Interests are
directly opposed to the interests of
the United States.
In the first place, the majority of
the powers represented at The
Hague tribunal are European and
Asiatic powers—un-American pow
ers—and those foreign powers have
ideas of government and of social
and political rights opposed to those
of the United States.
In the second place, these foreign
powers have as a rule actual ma
terial interests diametrically op
posed to those of the United States.
The Hague court is essentially a
foreign court in its constituent
parts and in its sympathy and sen
timent. Therefore, questions which
are immediately and peculiarly
American can not be safely sub
mitted to it.
There is no better illustration of
this fact than the one to be de
rived from the Panama canal ques
tion. The United States built the
canal after a European nation had
failed to build it. The United States
built the canal entirely with its
own money and with its own efforts
and enterprise. The United States
acquired finally as its own abso
lute property the territory through
which the canal zone passes.
Is Part of United States.
The canal zone, therefore, is as
much a possession of the United
States as the District of Columbia,
in which the capital at Washington
is situated. The canal is a domes
tic possession of the United States
and our property rights in the canal
are fully established by purchase.
Poreign nations desire certain
privileges in the canal. Shall the
United States submit the question
of how many privileges foreign na
tions shall’ have to a.n arbitration
board composed in its large ma
jority of the representatives of the
foreign nations interested?
Would a dispute between capital
and labor be submitted for arbitra
tion to a board composed mainly of
capitalists; or. on the other hand,
to a board composed mainly of la
bor men? If a farmer had a dis
pute about the ownership of a cer
tain portion of his farm would lie
submit that dispute to the decision
of the other claimant to the land?
It is obvious that American inter
ests could not receive fair consid
eration from The Hague tribunal in
the matter of this Panamd ques
tion.
It is probably true that no ques
tion involving distinctly American
interests or American ideas or
American points of view would re
ceive altogether just treatment
from this characteristically foreign
court. The United States is a mili
tant republic, and its success as a
republic is a perpetual impeach
ment of dynastic and despotic
forms of government. The United
States is an extremely progressive
country, and its ideas, its govern
mental attitude, its fundamental
Principles, arouse the prejudices
and opposition of most European
and Asiatic governments. The
United States is a very prosperous
and powerful country, and its pow
der and prosperity arouse the jeal
ousy and the envy, and perhaps,
also, to a certain extent, the dread
of many foreign governments. Some
of these things tend to prejudice
some foreign governments, and
other of these things tend to preju
dice other foreign governments
against the ideas and interests of
the United States.
In view of these facts the impro
priety of submitting a matter so
intimately involving American in-,
terests as tire Panama canal ques
tion to foreign and selfishly inter
ested arbitration is evident. In ad
dition to which Senator Root, who
is the chief American representa
tive at Tiie Hague, has been the
chief attorney for the foreign in
terests in the United States senate
throughout this Panama canal
question.
The claim is made by men like
Root, a senator of the United
States, and men like Whitelaw
Reid, an ambassador of the Unit .|
States to the court of St.
that they are influenced in titei
titude by a question of hono if
they were influenced by questm;..
of honor, they would be hono.al,',
representing the American pop],,
and the American interests, being
selected and paid to do so. They
would not be dishonorably repre
senting the opponents of the Amer,
incan people and using the pov, ,r
and the position which the Amer
ican people have given them :.n
oppose-the rights and the interco
of the American people.
A Delicate Sense, of Honor.
Ex-Senator Chauncey M Depew
who is now abroad giving inter
views in support of foreign claim
is also influenced by his delicate
sense of honor, so he says. Chaun
cey Depew began his public carer:
as a lobbyist for the New York
Central railroad, endeavoring in
the dark corridors of the eapitol at
Albany to promote certain bills by
methods and arguments which even
the New York Central was not will
ing to make public. Chauncey De
pew, having proven, his ability ar
a lobbyist, was sent to the United
States senate to lobby in his offi
cial capacity more effectively in
the interests of corrupt corpora
tions.
In the same way Root has been
sent to the United States senate
for the same purposes by the same
influences. What these agents of
the trusts in public life are ex
pected to do and actually do is re
vealed in the Standard Oil letters.
Senator Depew figures discredit
ably in these Standard Oil letter l ,
and Senator Depew was shown >
have been disgracefully involved in
the insurance scandal. It is diffi
cult to see, therefore, at whnt
stage of his career Senator Depew
developed his delicate sense of
honor, and why, if it is a trie
sense of honor, it does not m-c.i
--sionally stimulate him to act in ti>-
interests of the people of the United
States.
As a matter of fact. Senator De
pew represents the railroads now
as always, and in his opposition
to the rights of the American peo
ple in this canal question he is rep
resenting the railroads and the in
terests of the railroads. The rai -
roads are not satisfied with the bid
that has passed congress and hns
been signed by the president
This bill prevents railroads from
owning ships that would go through
the canal in competition or in lack
of competition, with the railroads
themselves. It places other e
strictions upon the other monopo
listic corporations, and so tie
agents of the railroads and tin
othei monopolistic corporation,
public life have opposed the bid
on questions of high honor.
Have Forgotten Patriotism
A good many newspapers hav"
so gotten their patriotism and n 2
leeted the interests of the Amer
ican people, moved by the same
corporation influences. Corpofatiim
not only have no souls, but have
no patriotism. They have been en
gaged so long in exploiting tin
people that they are willing m
adopt the shortsighted policy n f
furthering their own immediate in
terests at the expense of the peo
ple ami to the injury of the gci -
erous country that creates the 'i
and protects them. The corpora
lion agents of publicity and of pol
itics are merely carrying out th
orders of their selfish masters. Tim
American people must act f" : '
themselves in preserving their
rights. Mr. Taft lias done well up
to the present in protecting Air''
lean interests, and deserves t'i p
gratitude of patriotic American cit
izens. It is to Ye hoped that in
spite of his reputation for int-’i -
stancy and inconsistency lie wiH
adhere to the patrotic American
policy on which he has embark< ■
and will refuse to submit American
rights to the judgment of a biase
foreign court or to entrust them m
the hands of attorneys fo
eignv, interests.
WILLIAM ItANIJUI.PH HEARST