« AnteriorContinuar »
loving people of the world without affecting the laws of neutrality.
I should like to see some such clause embodied in the resolutions.
I have the pleasure of presenting to the delegates Hon. William Jennings Bryan, of Nebraska.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: There are so many delegates who have not had an opportunity to express themselves upon these questions and it is so important that those who have taken the trouble to come here,―many of them traveling hundreds of miles, -it is so important that they shall have part in these proceedings, that is is hardly fair that we, who have been assigned places on the program should take the time that might otherwise be given to the public in full discussion of these questions. And then, too, I am aware of this fact, that each one looking at the question from his own standpoint may present a thought that is entirely new, and that may be very useful even to those who are prominent in the work and have given great consideration to the subject, believing as I do that "Everybody knows better than anybody," and believing that we can gain wisdom from all who earnestly desire to advance this movement, I am only going to occupy your time for a moment this morning and leave the rest of the forenoon to others, for I have ample opportunity this afternoon and twice to-night to say what I have to say to you. I have not had the opportunity to look over all of these resolutions. came here this morning especially to see that one idea which I regard as important is included in the resolutions, and that is, that where questions not included in arbitration treaties arise, instead of being a cause of war, should be submitted for impartial investigation at the hands of an International Tribunal in order that cause for war may be removed. This resolution I want to discuss this afternoon more at length. It was adopted by unanimous vote in the Interparliamentary Union last July in London, when twenty-six great nations were represented, and I was glad this morning when I came here to find that the spirit of this resolution has been included by the committee in the resolutions that have been presented here, and I am sure that will be the
unanimous sentiment of the delegates here, that we should take this step now, for I regard it as a long step in the direction of the elimination of war among the nations.
The only other thought that I wish to present is this: I believe that the resolutions do not include a provision that money should be considered just as war vessels and ammunition are. I believe that the time has come when we should express it as the opinion of those who are assembled here that the loaning of money by a neutral nation should be regarded as being as objectionable as furnishing powder and shell (applause); for with what consistency can we say that a neutral nation shall not furnish powder or lead or munitions of war, and then say that the money-lenders of that nation may furnish the money with which to buy the things that are prohibited. There are very few people in a country who would want to loan this money, and I am not willing, for my part, that the interest of the great majority of the people shall be sacrificed that a few money-lenders in any country may be able to profit by the distress of nations. (Applause.) In time of war these loans draw a higher rate of interest and there the money-lender is able to take advantage of the necessity of nations forced to borrow, and while it may be very profitable to the money-loaners of the different nations to thus carry on war and make profit, I think the people who have no pecuniary interest to serve by such transactions and have a moral purpose to advance, can find it to their advantage to express that moral purpose in the resolutions of this body. (Applause.)
MR. DUTTON :
It is now ten minutes to twelve, and I move that at halfpast twelve a vote be taken on the resolutions presented by the committee.
The motion was adopted.
MR. A. H. LOVE:
MR. CHAIRMAN, AND GOOD FRIENDS ALL: You cannot be surprised that I commend most heartily the resolutions that have been presented; that I commend the New York Peace Society for its tremendous advance over what was possible here in 1868, when we met in Dodsworth Hall with the same principles, and yet could not muster one hundred and fifty people.
I think every good thing may be made a little better. For instance, you speak of the treaties of arbitration between the countries. But sincerity and faithfulness in carrying out these treaties are essential to the preservation of Peace and the prevention of war. The original rescript calling for the first Hague Conference should be reaffirmed and adhered to. There are principles in that which must not be overlooked. Strict neutrality, as was said by the last speaker, should be preserved when nations are on the eve of war or engaged in war, so that no support may be given to either side in any form whatsoever, and that vessels and other property of neutrals shall not be subject to seizure. A portion of this has, I find, been expressed in the resolutions; but the part that Mr. Bryan has referred to I very heartily endorse. In our own city, at Cramp's shipyard, vessels were fitted out during the war and afterward turned against us, as in Turkey, when we wished to collect a debt, though the vessels had been built in Philadelphia.
Again, no effort should be made to collect alleged debts against any country by force, but all such claims should be carried to the Hague Court. Mr. Hay said to me in his own mansion at Washington a short time before his death, "Never will I uphold the collection of alleged debts by deadly force."
The Hague Court of which you have spoken should be permanent, and its decisions final.
Again, I believe that every effort should be made by the coming Hague Conference to remove the causes of war, so that the principles of justice, humanity, and the general welfare shall be more and more recognized. In that way armies will finally be reduced, and navies will be driven to the point of ceasing, if justice is at the bottom of all international negotiations.
One last thought. I have wished for a better word than limitation-limitation is good, but there is a better word after that, namely, reduction, for when we limit, if we do limit, we still give some countenance to war. Therefore let us see that an appropriate reduction both of the army and of the navy be recommended, and some plan adopted for its carrying out in good faith by each nation.
MRS. LUCIA AMES MEAD: Mr. Chairman: It is a significant fact that at Chicago, last month, at the annual meeting of the State and City Superintendents of Schools of the United
States, where twelve hundred and fifty educators were gathered together, they passed unanimously a resolution recommending that on the eighteenth of May-the anniversary of the opening of the Hague Conference-there should be given instruction to the children of the Public Schools on the significance of that day.
It is also a noteworthy fact, that in December, in Minneapolis, the American Federation of Labor passed resolutions which cover four-fifths of those which are presented to you to-day, and are endorsed by the Interparliamentary Union, and that three thousand local trade unions were requested to send to President Roosevelt their approval of these resolutions.
I wish to say, that so far as I represent the National Council of Women and the National Woman's Suffrage Association, I believe that we stand together solidly for the principles embodied in these resolutions.
The first Hague Conference discussed the most difficult question-limitation of armaments-which is, we trust, to come up at the second Hague Conference. They made a mess of it, for they began at the wrong end of the problem. They began balancing battleships with battleships, and cruisers with cruisers, and tonnage with tonnage, and got into a hopeless mathematical snarl. President Roosevelt, though he speaks in a conservative and cautious way, nevertheless seems to think that limitation of armaments may be brought about at the second Hague Conference, and suggests that it may be done by lessening the size of ships. Most of the Englishmen who have carefully considered the problem think it should be done by limitation of war budgets for the next five years, making them not to exceed that of the last five years. I thank Mr. Stead for emphasizing the fact the other day that limitation of armaments is not disarmament. All we ask is a little halt,-a truce, until we can get our breath and think. We don't expect to accomplish everything at the next Hague Conference: four-fifths of what we here ask may possibly be endorsed there.
The chief doubt seems to be as to the possibility of getting the limitation of armaments. It largely depends upon the public sentiment of our people as to whether our government shall extend a strong and helpful hand to England, whose Premier is leading the world in this forward movement. If we, who have
not an enemy in the world, are in this great opportunity suspicious and timid or apathetic, we shall not deserve the place among the nations that we now claim.
MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: I am commissioned by the State Board of Trade of Massachusetts to present to this body a resolution, but before I read it, I must read another resolution passed by that board June 17, 1905, that you may fully understand it:
"Resolved, That in the judgment of the Massachusetts State Board of Trade the time has come when, by treaty, neutral zones should be established from the ports of North America to the ports of Great Britain and Ireland and the continent of Europe, within which zones vessels shall be free to pass without invasion."
I move the following resolution:
"Resolved, That the neutralization of trade routes of the ocean as proposed by the Massachusetts State Board of Trade, June 17, 1905, incorporated into the platform of the twelfth annual meeting of the Mohonk Conference on International Arbitration, June, 1906, adopted at the fifteenth universal Peace Congress held in Milan, Italy, September, 1906, favorably considered at a session of the International Congress of the Chamber of Commerce in Milan in September, 1906, referred to a committee for study of the Twenty-third Conference of the International Law Association, held in Berlin, October, 1906, and unanimously adopted as a part of its memorial to the President at the present session of the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, be approved by this Congress as in the interest of the Peace Movement and worthy of the consideration of the governments of the world, and the consideration of the coming Hague Conference."
Very briefly, Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, we must move along several lines if we expect ultimately to reach the standpoint of Peace. We are doing magnificent work along the lines of various questions that may be a cause of war and also of reducing the cause of war.