Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

1 EDITORIAL. RAGE The Atlanta Georgian the home pappr Our Rights, All Our Rights and Nothing But Our Rights The Administration's second note to Germany is notable « for its self-restraint and pacificatory tone—which is to say, it is „ notable for its sanity. 1 President Wilson has neither forced a quarrel upon a nation 2 desirous of remaining friendly, nor has he withdrawn any de- * mands which the United States had a recognized right to present. From the beginning of this controversy The Georgian has in sisted that our Government should stand for Our Rights, All Our Rights and Nothing But Our Rights. I In the main this note, the first to be signed by Acting Secre- “I tary of State Robert Lansing, conforms to this principle. I The Georg ian has urged that the note r.hould be pacificatory eoi i in tone. In fact, it is eminently so. * M The Georgian has insisted that there were matters involved in the case of the Lusitania that could not be determined off-hand Cu €1 by the dictum of the United States, but must be left for future discussion. The note in fact opens the way for further consideration of ’ ID every mooted point. Intetf The Georgian protested against anything that should savor H of an ultimatum. The note invites “assurances" but does not close the door ,,»■ upon arguments. Nothing further removed from ultimatum in tone or substance could be imagined. The Georgian said recently: It is announced on behalf of the Administration that the , •J, note on its way to Germany “by no means closes the way to - ending the question by peaceful means.” 1 Hi We hope this is true. It certainly ought to be true. It it* would be one of the great crimes of history for any note to be I indited bv the United States which would close the doors to as peaceful negotiations over a question of national rights upon £ which even loyal Americans hold two opinions. [> Hit It is unjust for the United States to demand of Germany !' M I H B 8 the surrender of her right to prosecute her war upon the ocean in the only way left to her. lint that the refusal of Germany to make this tremendous Concession should be even thought of as a 1 cause for our declaring war ought to he unthinkable. ®u3 It is quite obvious that this note is not at all what Mr. f Bryan’s action seemed to suggest. . | It is equally obvious that it opens the way to temperate dis- » cussion of all points at issue. I It employs no word or phrase that can be construed as a Phone peremptory demand that Germany abandon at once and for all * her submarine attacks upon the commerce of the Allies. * On this subject the note merely seeks to suggest the more 2!<t j““U humane and generally accepted methods of such attack. On the contrary, the paragraph which touches upon the Ttriw:" COVC Vexed question of the “war zone” does so with such tactful sug gestion of German good faith that it may well be quoted as illus- trative of the conciliatory phraseology of the whole: cSi iuKf an 4 T Oordv* “The Government of the United States can not admit that the proclamation of a war zone from which neutral ships have been warned to keep away may be made to operate as in any degree an abbreviation of the rights either of American shipmas ters or of American citizens bound on lawful errands as passen gers on merchant ships of belligerent nationality. It dons not understand the Imperial German Government to question those rights. It understands it, also, to accept as established beyond question the principle that the lives of noncombatants can not lawfully or rightfully be put in jeopardy by the capture or de struction of an unresisting merchantman, and to recognize the obligation to take sufficient precautions to ascertain whether a suspected merchantman is in fact of belligerent nationality or is in fact carrying contraband of war under a neutral flag.” / 'OUR £W ffPll OUR mirm (0 rammi ights: 'tjmms: AND NOTHING »UT OLM? WOLFMAL RIGHTS. Vs-» That this paragraph should be followed by a request that Germany give assurances that her position is as understood by the United States is but reasonable. In connection with the reference to the representations made in the note of May 1 5, it seems to consti tute a milder restatement of the case in a way that may offer a graceful method of retir ing from those paragraphs of the first note that were harsh in verbiage and untenable in purpose. It is notable that President Wilson once more bases his contention upon the broad ground of humanity. Of the original demands made by the United States he says that this Government ^ “relies in these representations upon the principles of humanity, the universally recognized understandings of international law, and the ancient friendship of the German nation. ’ ’ We yield to no one, not even to the President, in our devotion to the principle of humanity. It is in the service of humanity that The Georgian has fought against such a presen tation of the American case as would provoke war—for war is the negation of all hu manity. The President is right to protest in the name of humanity against all the inhumane acts of this war—not against only a few which have impressed themselves especially upon his conciousness. But he must remember that when we intervene diplomatically we must T ave the rights recognized and stated by international law in mind. Every day, every hour, in this savage war the principles of humanity are being violated by every participant. This is the deplorable fact that exists and which the people of the United States would gladly do away with if they could. But in moving effectively as a government to prevent such acts we must have a recognized right to intervene. Our action must be based upon defined and accepted principles of international law. If we confine ourselves to these recognized rights, and seek to defend only our rights as neutrals, we may, and probably will, establish ourselves in such a position of justice and authority that we may hope eventually to help materially in bringing this war and all its inhumanity to a conclusion. But if we take an extreme, a biased, or in any way unjusti fiable position, we shall only be regarded as a partisan, and not ^8 an unprejudiced arbitrator. Apparently the Administration policy is not far from the program outlined by Mr. Hearst in this signed editorial: “LET US STAND FIRMLY IN DEFENSE OR OUR JUST RIGHTS, EVEN THOUGH WE MUST MAINTAIN THEM BY FORCE OF ARMS, BUT LET US NOT PRECIPITATE THE COUNTRY INTO AN UNNECESSARY WAR BY GOING BE YOND OUR OWN RIGHTS AND DEMANDING THE PRIV ILEGE OF DICTATING TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN MAT TERS WHICH HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED THE DEFINI TION AND SANCTION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.” Our just rights are not difficult of statement. So far as rights at- sea are concerned they are succinctly set forth thus in the same editorial: “We can not require that German submarines shall cease to attack British ships or French ships or Italian ships, but we can demand, and stand ready to enforce the demand, that German submarines cease to attack American ships.” But prior to that time The Georgian thus sharply defined the limitations upon the United States’ right of interference: “We have a right, and it is our duty, to question Germany forcibly and with determination in regard to the attack upon the Gulflight, in regard to the attack upon the Cushing, in regard to the avowed policy of sinking merchantmen in the war zone around the British Isles without proper investigation of their nationality. “These are questions in which Americans are interested— profoundly, anxiously, vitally interested. “But we have no right to question GERMANY’S USE OF SUBMARINES IN HER WARFARE UPON BRITISH COM MERCE. “It is no possible business of ours whether Germany sinks British ship with torpedoes, with mines or with gunfire. 4 ‘ These are not matters between America and Germany, but SOLELY MATTERS BETWEEN GERMANY AND GREAT BRITAIN.” The President’s note leaves the Administration in a position —if it chooses to take it—of basing its future contentions purely upon these absolutely defensible and tenable rights. To that extent the President is to be congratulated. And if he will main tain that position in the future both the President and the coun try will be doubly fortunate. Mr. Bryan, whose precipitate retreat from the Cabinet was supposed to portend a peculiarly intemperate and provocating note, is left in a most embarrassing position. How it could have been possible for him to sign the first note, which was threatening, and refuse to sign the second, which was mollifying, must ever remain a mystery. The American people ought now to be able to look forward to the proper assertion of the rightful demands of the nation in stead of the extreme and unreasonable demands of the original note, now deliciately set over, if not indeed fully eliminated. With such a statement of our case which shall assert Our Neutral Rights, All Our Neutral Rights and Nothing But Our Neutral Rights, we may expect a peaceful and just settlement of the pending questions. The German nation, for its part, must realize that such a note as this second note embodies and expresses the united senti ment of the American people, and will be maintained by every man of our citizenship. Woman Suffrage to Aid S*ate and Nation I AM a believer in woman suf frage. While I am opposed j to proceeding by an amend ment to the national Constitu tion. because I think it a matter which the fepreaentative States should determine, I am, neverthe less, fully committed to the belief that woman suffrage is not only right In theoi'y but beneficial in active practice. We have had woman suffrage in my State for more than twenty years I entertain no doubt that tendency is all for the good— r the advantage and benefit of politic generally. I am sure that none of the evils By WILLIAM EDGAR BORAH and none of the tendencies which the opponents of woman suffrage so often prophesy and seem great ly to fear have resulted from suf frage in our State. On the. other hand, I can see much good result ing from it. Of course, woman suffrage Is not a panacea for all the ill? of the body politic; it will not elimi nate all evils or prevent all bad practices. There will be incompe tent officers, corruption in office, unwise legislation so long as the human race lingers on the hither side of the millennium. But, woman suffrage is, never theless, a distinct substantial step. in my judgment, toward the les sening of the evils and bettering the conditions of politics. Her in fluence in oolitics, like her influ ence in every sphere of life in which she moves, is for the good. Both Just and Wise. 1 feel quite certain that those who have closely observed the effect of woman suffrage through a number of years \\ill pronounce it both just and wise. I am equal ly sure that If the question In my State were left to th,e male vote alone woman suffrage would be continued there. I saw’ a statement the other day that in thos>e States where woman suffrage prevails the better class of women do not take part in politics and do not vote, while the more undesirable or w’holly unde sirable do take part and do vote. I am sure that this is not true. While speaking about the ques tion of not voting, allow me to call your attention to the fact that in a late Presidential election In one of the most populous States of the Union, a State where woman suf frage is now up for consideration, more than 100,000 voters remained away from the polls. Investigation disclosed that the greater portion of those who re mained away were but*lness men who could have voted w’ith but little inconvenience, living In thickly-settled communities—no such shameless betrayal of the duties and obligations of citizen ship, even proportionately, can be charged to the “better class” of women In any suffrage State. If I had my w’ay about it I w’ould forfeit a citizen's right to vote when through no reasonable excuse, he failed to meet this prime obligation of citizenship. That would be far more sensible than to make the right to vote depend upon sex. Will Not Condone Wrong. You may argue until dooms day that women are no better than me and have no higher Ideals and w’ill vote about th»* same way, yet a political gather ing will Inevitably act upon the theory that It Is not safe to reiy upon the woman to condone « wrong or ratify a questions* transaction. Permit me here to my in »hi* connection that while aa good women as live are sincere.y op posed to suffrage and whi.e men disinterested and patriotic are op posed to suffrage, and most sin cerely so. yet it is nevertheless true that every evil and vicious Influence in politics is opposed to woman suffrage I There vu a time in the history of Kov+rnmtntt when it was not so important that women be per mitted to vote, for the busin**.* of the government was largely that of defending by tor'*. against op posing fo** H a business of th** Mt*te 4 ,r, the**- days is far oth erwise Th-re . r ’ phase of our Ilf-, practically no < of * t g Into whJchthe * doee no* Strode and shout wr > , y ' ' * does rot obtain. V*es r 4 *•%* •»*% N*w Arise. A -r r* #- very '/m'eiy*.hie ques- ' ? * row ret* *d Jr: * he domain # Tne O ;e«f'on of the - f and educatioa of the child, the sacred circle of the home and family, birth, education, marriage are looked Into, super vised, directed and molded by the State. Everything in these days for weal or woe feels the impress of politics. Nothing Is too sacred or too small for the Htate’s consideration, and in its la*t analysis practically all great questions of to-day are moral questions. Politics has, therefore, entered Into woman's domain, usurped the place which once was euPP°* e to be practically under her do minion. and why are women un der such circumstances, denied the most potent effertuatlr.g results In P • ■ the ballot? . The supreme question I lna with the tremendous obliga tions which shall rest upon that citizenship. And I maintain that In the question of the rearing of citi zenship, In the making of the laws and especially the customs and practices which shall shape and mold the lives of the citizens, we can not. we dare not. deny our selves the wisdom, the Intuition of woman, and under present conditions she can only make that wisdom and intuition effective through the ballot. It Is woman's duty to be there and it Is man's duty to give her the most effective Instrument of warfare when »he goes there. Give her the ballot It will net degrade her and she will not dis honor It It Is the only really ef fective Instrument of political warfare. I I | ' I I * I i t I H > I , • I? < IV I • ■ v»