THE RECALL OF THE CAPTAINS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2674, 21 January 1916, Page 4

THE RECALL OF THE CAPTAINS

GERMAN INTRIGUE IN AMERICA

INTERESTING PRESS OPINIONS

The. New York "Outlook" of December 15 publishes a summary of American newspaper opinions concerning the cases of Captains 13oy-ed and von Papen, which is of interest here as indicating the feeling in tho United States regarding German mischief-making there. We give tho "Outlook's" article in full: — "Oil December 2 our Government requested tho Government of Germany to recall Captain Karl Boy-ed, naval attache, and Captain Frsnz von Papen, military attache of tho German Embassy at Washington, on the ground that their further presence here is objectionaltle. In taking this action, it was added, Secretary Lansing was acting with the full approval of the President, who, is understood to have deterniined that the TJnited_ States shall be. rid of any foreign officials who are obnoxious by reason of activities harmful to the best interests of the nation. The official statement of the State Department is as follows:— On account of what this Government considers improper activities in military and naval matters, this Government has requested the immediate recall of Captain Boy-Ed and Captain.von Papon, as they are no longer acceptable, or persona . grata, to this Government. "The New York 'Evening Sun' thus explains:—'There are no formal charges against them. America does not seok to 'establish any case against them, - such as j would almost necessarily- implicate their own Government and increase the awkwardness of the present relations with Germany. America'merely wants them to go. America 'lias the right to say that they must go.' "The Brooklyn 'Citizen 1 says:—'lt pleases the German-American Preßs to represent the course taken by President Wilson as a sop to England. - Only German Americans who allow their passions to got the mastery over' their reasoning faculties will believe this.' •

"And the New York 'Times':. 'No American citizen of German birth or descent who intends to make this country his permanent home can delude himBelf witli the belief that our sentiments will change. . . -. And it would seem reasonablo to suppose ' that GermanAmericans who do intend to remain here would have it borne in upon them that they are not promoting tlioir own comfort, that they are not maintaining the traditions of good citizenship (and we have been accustomed to extol the good citizenship of German-Americans) by declamatory persistence in extolling Prussian ideals which wo have definitely and lor all timo declared to be unacceptable. The sympathies that ties of blood; engender wo can well understand, but we havo not and cannot put out of our view tho loyalty thait should spring from birth or the oath of- naturalisation.'

"In the Buenz case (the prosecution of the director of tho Hamburg-America line of/stoamers for conspiring to break tho diipping laws), the plea .is made that, while the defendants might have been guilty of some technical violations of tho customs laws of the United States, they had no criminal intentions. 'Had no criminal intentions!' exclaims tho Hew York 'Telegram,' and adds: 'The German commander probably had no criminal intent when he sank the Lusitania. This legal twaddle over technicalities makes it evident that even with tho departure from these shores of tho Oscar II tho squirrels will not starve.'

"But 'America will definitely approve this action' (of the State Department), declares the Chicago 'Post.' 'There can be no doubt of that.' The 'Post' continues: 'Misuse of American passports, interference with American industries, subvention of American newspapers, deception of American port officials, crimes of violence against American ships and factories—iu all this long series the names of the German naval and military attaches, have figured with 'cumulative' effect. . . . Any nation less anxious to preserve a neutral position and ishuu the precipitation of the supremo issue with Gormany would have sent Boy-Ed and vou Papen home long ago.'

"And the Buffalo 'Enquirer' says: 'The demand for their recall comes long aftor popular , convincemeut that the Government should take stich action. It German officialdom should express its real opinion, it would bo wonder that the United' States held back the demand so long. The two captains have lasted months in Washington, where they would have lasted minutes in Berlin if the case had been reversed.'

" 'It is tho only course the United States can take in the- interest of national dignity and self-respect,' affirms the Sioux Falls 'Press,' and adds: "The European war must not, shall not, be fought on neutral American ground. Twice we havo served notico that this is the American position, that we are a neutral people, by requiring the recall of foreign representatives, in the first case the Ambassador from Austria-Hun-gary, and now the naval and military attaches of Germany. It should have, and doubtless will have, tho desired effect so far as our internal interests are concerned.'

"The Rochester 'Union and Advertiser' also thinks that our course will deter some who would otherwise be active in behalf of Germany to a degree that might disturb the peace and tranquility of the United States. The Rochester paper continues: 'Of course, if the example does not suffice, we have still the power aud authority conferred upon our Government by our Constitution and the laws passed under it. It is time that the interference, if not on behalf of, at least in the interests of, Germany, with perfectly legitimate business in this country were elided. Much "property has been damaged, and many lives have been taken by these enemies of our countrv. Drastic punishment should be meted out to those found guilty of such outrages.' "Why was the Department of State slow in taking action after it had the proofs of objectionable activity? For two reasons, replied tho Waterbury 'American.' First, because of 'the reported refusal to allow Brand Whitlock to return to_ Belgium.' Second, .because of the Lusitania controversy. Tho Waterbury paper thus cxnlains: —

" Germany refuses to acknowledge her crime against humanitr and to make the demanded disavowal and reparation, to us. So long as the question of Germany's attitude was in doubt, the State Department, quite naturally, did not wish to -make a- move that ■would embitter Germany and cudaugor the L-usi-tanio negotiations.'

"The difference between the offences of the Hamburg-American officials and those of the two captains is thus pointed out by the Washington Times.' The first 'violated our nntional statutes in the. way they sent and tried to send supplies to German warships. But they were not tried for sending the supplies. They wore Jiot convicted because it was a crime to'send the supplies. They have not been sentenced to jail because of that at all. They are to he punished fo;- deceiving and for conspiring to deceive the Government —with false manifests—us to what they were doing, though it were proper enough to do the thing itself.' On the other band, tho captains' asserts the Washington paper, "are different in an unqualifiedly reprehensible and absolutely unpardonab.. degree.' The 'Times' proci'wls: .

11 'Official .auoits of "tliis nation 'they

plotted deliberately io involve its neutraUtj. Kepresentatives of the German Government, bouwl by code not to betray our hospitality, they were, in effect,, making war beixi on our soil, not only against Powers/ with which we -ire friendly, but against the American people themselves. Of all the hideous crimes—arson, dynamiting, murder— committed iti this country in a lawless and cowardly attempt our supplies from going to the Allies*, the Captain Boy-eds and Captain von Papens undoubtedly are not directly guilty. But they have been the inspiration, if not the agency, of the Teutonic plots and conspiracies.' "A comparison, in general, of the rocords of the nations at "war in their dealings witli_ this country suggests to another Washington paper," the 'Herald,' find to many another observer, a compelling reason why the American people cannot feel neutral: "On the ono sido their rights have been scrupulously regarded, on the other they have been ruthlessly trampled upon or sccretly plotted against.'