UNHAPPY MEXICO

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2598, 21 October 1915, Page 6

UNHAPPY MEXICO

WHO IS AT FAULT?

AMERICANS- SHARE OF THE BLAME Interesting comments on-the Btato of anarchy in Mexico, and tho reasons why it is being allowed to continue, were made by Archbishop O'Shea in an interview with a Dominion reporter yesterday. His Grace has just returned from a visit to America, and in the courso of liis journoyings in the States he passed through the town : of ,El Paso, on tho American frontier, in which town Huerta, an ex-President of the Republic, is held as a prisoner by tho United States Government. At El Paso American soldiers were patrolling the frontier. v "There is a very strong feeling among large sections of the American people that it is a disgrace to the United States that things should have been allowed to get into tho 6tato tbey now are in Mexico," said the Archbishop "America made a show of interfering in the beginning, hut the plain truth is that she) is not even yet prepared to intervene seriously. She has no soldiers. She is utterly unprepared for war, even with Mexico. Of course, in time America could boat Mexico, but it might tako two or three years, and the sacrifice might be very heavy. That is the real reason why tiio Americans backed out of the business. They have been trying by diplomatic ' means to bring about a settlement, and they havo called in the help of the South Americau Republics. The other day I read a cablegram Which stated that the Pan-American Congress had agreed to recognise Can-aim. That seemed to me altogether ail unlikely possibility when I was there, because the general opinion was that neither Carranza ror Villa was fit to rule any decent couiir try. The aim of tho Congress was to have elections conducted in a constitutional way, in order that a president might be- elected who would keep some sort of order. "The mistake America made was to allow arms and munitions to go into Mexio) to the different rebel leaders. If America stopjjed this, as they seemed to bo oil the point of doing when I left, the troubles in Mexico would fizzle out. But as long as America allows arms to go into Mexico for any scoundrel who gets up against the Government, there will be trouble. Until this trad© in arms is stopped no Government can rule in Mexico. There are so many of these rebels—bandits and highwaymen they are in fact who, if they can get arms, will got a following, and will figlit any Government. The trado in arms is tho result in the first place of tho greed of tho American manufacturers, and Americans admitted to me that the illicit trade was the crux of the whole matter. Had tnese scoundrels who are disturbing Mexico to-day not been, helped, Huerta, so-I was informed, would have been able to maintain a stable Government. Ifc is truo that Huerta- was no saint, but ho was better than these others—Villa and Carranza. I was informed, also, that he was not so black as ]io was painted ( and t-liat, especially in regard to tho report that he w-as implicated in the murder of President Madero, he was unjustly charged. "Mexico is a most, difficult- country to govern. I met several Mexicans and they told mo a lot of things. They all agreed that the Americans wore to blame for exporting arms into the country. Many of the Mexican people are only half civilised, and ill all of them there is a- strong infusion of Indian blood. Americans now see that what Mexico really needs is a strong man, a dictator, to set up a Government and to maintain it, and to keep down insurrection. Thev want another President like Porfirio Diaz. Many unkind things were written about him, but he was tho only man who could maintain law and order there. He is the sort of ruler that would not suit us or the Americans, because we do not need such a ruler, but ho is the onlv sort of- man who can save Mexico. It is nonsense to talk _of representative government for Mexico for a long time vet."