The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER FRIDAY, MARCH 31, 1916. AMERICAN POLICY.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXVIV, Issue 98, 31 March 1916, Page 4

The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER FRIDAY, MARCH 31, 1916. AMERICAN POLICY.

The ideal American policy of keeping out of the lighting at any cost of cliginity and national honour, which President Wilson apparently clings to, must be exceedingly irksome to many of his countrymen. It has been asked whether there is any conception of a national duty in regard to the war in America, and Mr G. G. Peer, a wellknown historian and writer on American affairs, has put forth a view which it is affirmed is gaining ground in the United States. Mr Beer considers that both Britain and America

are partly to blame for the war ; Britain because she refused to assume the burden of adequate military preparedness, thus indirectly encouraging Germany’s plan to dominate Europe, and America because of a ‘‘self-centred aloofness from European affairs which deliberately ignored the obligations that every State owes to mankind.” The reference to America’s attitude of subjecting everything to the race for wealth is certainly a pleasantly mild one, not calculated to cause any uneasiness to Americans. Mr Beer admits that since the future of democracy depends on the success of the Allies, they are almost literally lighting America’s battles. Yet because America lias only a very dim realisation of this, though predominantly pro-Ally in sentiment, she does not recognise any obligation to intervene, and '‘the neutrality maintained by Washington is an accurate expression of the will of the people.” One is inclined to wonder if there are no limits to the endurance slum u by Washington in face of the continued piracy of the Germans. The writer above quoted is insistent that America should profit by the war’s lessons, and ally herself afterwards with “the only Powers with whom our political traditions and mu- material interests would permit active co-operation, Entente Powers, among which -“England would

j naturally he one to whom our common i civilisation would draw us most close- | ly.” Hitherto, he remarks, “by the fortunate accident of position the Engj lisli-speaking peoples have been able I to escape the burdens and dangers of , large military establishments. Apparently if they do not pool their de- ! fensive resources neither branch will, he thus fortunate in future.” ' course Mr Beer may he perfectly right iu his reasoning—from an American view-point, but the Entente Rowers, I including Britain, may not be at all I ( anxious, after the war is ended, for 1 an alliance with a nation whose policy j has been so profoundly weak and I vacillating.