"We are standing to-day very near the brink of war, but I want to assure you that if we should be drawn into the conflict it will be only after our President has exhausted every means consistent with upholding the honour and dignity of the United States to keep us from war. I left Berlin with a clear conscience, because I felt that during all my stay there I had omitted nothing to make for friendly relations and peace between the two nations."I am very glad to-day to see on the list of this Reception Committee the names of people of German descent. It is but natural that citizens of German descent in the beginning of the war should have had a sentimental feeling toward Germany, that they should have looked back through rose-coloured glasses on that land which, however, they left because they did not have equality of opportunity. We read to-day in the newspapers for the first time that there is a prospect that after the war the Germans will be given an equal share in their own government. I believe that in our hour of trial we can rely upon the loyalty of our citizens of German descent, andif they would follow me I would not be afraid to go out with a regiment of them and without any fear of being shot from behind."The nation that stands opposite to us to-day has probably no less than 12,000,000 men under arms. I have seen the Germans take more prisoners in one afternoon than there are men in the entire United States Army."Does it not seem to you ridiculous that the two States of New York and New Jersey should have more chauffeurs in them than there are soldiers in our army? My companions from the Twelfth Regiment that have honoured me by coming here to-day, and more men like them throughout the country, have done what they can. But they can't do it all. There must be a public sentiment if we are to maintain ourselves as a nation. If we had a million men under arms to-day we should not be near the edge of war."Gentlemen, I have tried in Berlin to be, as the Mayor has told you, an American Ambassador, and I thank you because you, an audience of patriotic Americans, by your presence here set your seal of approval upon my conduct during the last two and a half years."
"We are standing to-day very near the brink of war, but I want to assure you that if we should be drawn into the conflict it will be only after our President has exhausted every means consistent with upholding the honour and dignity of the United States to keep us from war. I left Berlin with a clear conscience, because I felt that during all my stay there I had omitted nothing to make for friendly relations and peace between the two nations.
"I am very glad to-day to see on the list of this Reception Committee the names of people of German descent. It is but natural that citizens of German descent in the beginning of the war should have had a sentimental feeling toward Germany, that they should have looked back through rose-coloured glasses on that land which, however, they left because they did not have equality of opportunity. We read to-day in the newspapers for the first time that there is a prospect that after the war the Germans will be given an equal share in their own government. I believe that in our hour of trial we can rely upon the loyalty of our citizens of German descent, andif they would follow me I would not be afraid to go out with a regiment of them and without any fear of being shot from behind.
"The nation that stands opposite to us to-day has probably no less than 12,000,000 men under arms. I have seen the Germans take more prisoners in one afternoon than there are men in the entire United States Army.
"Does it not seem to you ridiculous that the two States of New York and New Jersey should have more chauffeurs in them than there are soldiers in our army? My companions from the Twelfth Regiment that have honoured me by coming here to-day, and more men like them throughout the country, have done what they can. But they can't do it all. There must be a public sentiment if we are to maintain ourselves as a nation. If we had a million men under arms to-day we should not be near the edge of war.
"Gentlemen, I have tried in Berlin to be, as the Mayor has told you, an American Ambassador, and I thank you because you, an audience of patriotic Americans, by your presence here set your seal of approval upon my conduct during the last two and a half years."
I have never been able to understand why so many people did not sooner realise what Kaiserism meant for us. But now, at last, the nation understands that we must fight on until this menace of military autocracy has vanished and that not until then will the world enjoy a lasting peace.
Almost as soon as I was settled in New York I was drafted. Drafted by a public curiosity whichinsisted on knowing something about Germany and the war.
And so for me began a new life—that of a public speaker—I spoke first in New York at a lunch at the Chamber of Commerce—war had not then been declared and I was compelled to be careful—for even then there seemed a fear of Germany, a foolish desire to surrender all manhood to a fat neutrality.
On April 2nd came President Wilson's message demanding war. I was in the opera house that night. Between the acts extras appeared. I telephoned Swope of theWorldwho confirmed the news. While I was receiving this information one of the directors of the Metropolitan Opera Company came in the room. I told him what had happened and asked if he was not going to do something—order the news read from the stage—for example, and the "Star Spangled Banner" played. He said, "No, the opera company is neutral."
I returned to the box where I was sitting and stepping to the front called on the house to cheer President Wilson. There was, for a moment, surprise at such unconventional action, but the whole house soon broke into cheers.
Conventionalism was gone.
The opera was DeKoven's "Canterbury Pilgrims" and a few minutes after the curtain rose on the last act Frau Ober, a German singer, who was taking one of the principal parts, keeled over in a faint,—rage, perhaps, that the Yankees were atlast daring to cheer, to assert themselves against the Kaiser!
As I spoke in Albany, Buffalo, Harrisburg, Trenton and Boston, in Philadelphia, Providence and many times in New York and other places, I noted always an eagerness to learn about Germany, the war and foreign affairs. We Americans had travelled, but not with our eyes open—"seeing, we saw not."
The first great, great question we faced was that of universal service for the war—or the selective draft—again how farsighted our President then proved himself. What would be our situation now if we had tried to go to war under the volunteer system? This question once solved, our President led us with a breadth of vision, an efficiency, and on a scale commensurate with the size of the undertaking in which we at last had become partners.
Perhaps we are a little over indulgent, however, in the treatment of the German enemy alien within our gates. No American singer or musician could travel about Germany at will, unwatched by the police, collecting money from Americans to be used in propaganda, or things much worse, against America. Americans in Germany are compelled to report twice daily to the police and cannot leave their homes at night. November 17, 1917—seven months after we went to war with Germany—I met Hugo Schmidt, a director of the Deutsche Bank, riding in Central Park. He lived at the German Club, saw whom he liked and only reportedto the police when he changed his residence. In January 1918, he was finally interned.
Long before our break with Germany, American consuls and officials were insulted in the street and in opera houses because they made use of their own language, not at all because they were taken for British for every one knew that all British had been interned.
The wife of our naval attaché attended a reception presided over by a German admiral's wife. She was presented to this high personage by the wife of a German naval officer, who, in making the presentation, spoke in English. The admiral's wife rebuked both the wife of our attaché and the officer's wife for daring to talk English. I am thankful to say that Mrs. Gherardi immediately left the house to receive later the officially ordered apologies of the admiral's wife.
And while Americans did not dare use their own language in Berlin in time of peace between the two countries yet after the outbreak of war, newspapers in the United States, printed in German, owned by Germans and German sympathisers, dared to attack America and her President.
The autocracy always hope to divide us, to make of us a Russia, torn by Maximalists and Minimalists, by Militarists and Bolsheviki and, consequently, impotent for war.
In travelling through the United States in August and September of 1917, although I was on private business, I made speeches in many cities, such as Minneapolis, and Helena, Billings, Butte and Missoulain Montana, Spokane, Seattle and Tacoma in Washington, Portland, Oregon, San Francisco and surrounding country, Los Angeles, San Diego and Pasadena and then Milwaukee, Chicago and Cleveland. In all this territory I found great enthusiasm, great patriotism and a sincere desire to learn about Germany and the war. But I found everywhere also the trail of Germany's poisonous propaganda.
The great majority of our citizens of German-American descent have been splendidly loyal to their country in this crisis of its history. But the fact must be faced that there are those who, for some unknown reason, still sympathise with the German Kaiser in his war of aggression.
More unfortunately there are politicians in America who seek the votes of those disaffected, and approach treason in doing so. In all the history of sordid politics, there is nothing more nauseating than the effort of these cheap politicians thus to gratify their personal ambitions.
Their shameful identity is known to all. A generation from now their own descendants will be applying to the courts for a change of name.
If, when the test comes, it is found that the votes of these disaffected citizens count for something in our elections, we must find some means to disenfranchise them rather than have our low politicians outbidding each other within the law in order to get these votes.
Have we not had examples enough from Russiaof what the slimy bribe and the snaky propaganda can do?
In Chicago, where one Thompson is Mayor, there is a censorship of moving picture films. The chief censor is Major Funkhouser. When I was in Los Angeles, at the end of September, like all strangers there, I visited movie-land to see the pictures made.
At the house of my college chum, Dr. Walter J. Barlow, I met the beautiful and celebrated Mary Pickford.
In conversation she told me about Major Funkhouser, and how he had refused an exhibition permit for one of her films called "The Little American." Curious to see the film rejected by Chicago officialdom, I asked Miss Pickford if she would have it run off for my benefit. I could see nothing in the film that could hurt the susceptibilities of any except the Germans with whom we are now engaged in war!
Later the Fox Film Company informed me that their film called "The Spy" and which deals with the adventures of an American who is supposed to go to Germany to get a list of German spies and agents in America, was refused the right of exhibition in Chicago by this same Major Funkhouser. In this case the Fox Company appealed in the courts and obtained from Judge Alschuler an injunction preventing any one from interfering with the exhibition of this film. The decision of Judge Alschuler was affirmed on appeal.
And yet the mass of the people in Chicago aresplendidly patriotic as the record of Chicago for enlistment and Red Cross and Liberty Loan shows.
When I spoke in the great Medinah Temple under the auspices of the Hamilton Club, on October twenty-second, I was able to show to the audience two German text-books used in the Chicago public schools, stamped with the royal arms of Prussia. The books had been approved by Ella Flagg Young, Superintendent of Schools, in 1914.
These books were furnished me by my friend, Anthony Czarnecki of theChicago Daily Newswhom I first met in Berlin where he came to do most excellent work for his paper. In one of these books is printed the German patriotic song, The Watch on the Rhine ("Die Wacht am Rhein"). What a howl there would have been if some public school superintendent had selected for the schools under her jurisdiction a text-book of English literature with the royal arms of England stamped on the cover and "Rule Britannia" prominently displayed inside!
These text-books were cleverly compiled to impress children at a youthful age with a favourable idea of kings and emperors. In one of these was an anecdote about Frederick the Great and a miller, and in another, one about the Emperor Charlemagne and the scholar, of course, making Frederick and Charlemagne appear as good kindly people, and giving the impression that all kings and emperors are beneficent beings. But no word is there in these books quoting the present German Emperor's statement in which he puts Frederick in the same class asthe four other bloody conquerors of history, Alexander, Julius Cæsar, Theodoric and Napoleon, and says that where they failed in their dreams of world conquest, his mailed fist will succeed. Why was not Frederick the Great's statement printed in these books, his admission that he engaged upon the Seven Years' War "in order to be talked about"?
These books contained quotations from Goethe. Why did they not contain Goethe's statement, "Amerika, du hast es besser."? (America, you are better off). Or his prophecy about the Prussians, "The Prussian was born a brute, and civilisation will make him ferocious."
The only foreign language taught in the grammar schools of Chicago is German. Parents are compelled to sign a statement in which they answer the question as to whether they wish their children to be taught German or not.
See how subtle this is! Doubtless if a Teuton parent answers that he does not desire to have his children taught German the paid agents of the German propaganda stir up feeling against these Germans who have dared to refuse to have their children taught the language of the fatherland.
And when a parent has once elected that his children shall be taught German, not the principal of the school, not the district superintendent, but only the head of all the Chicago school system, on the application of the parent, can excuse the child, during his or her school course, from further study of German.
Worst of all, however, is the Chicago officialschool speller, a book printed under the direction and compiled by the school authorities of Chicago. In this speller there is just one piece of reading matter and that a fulsome eulogy of the present German Emperor.
This is an account of an alleged incident of the Kaiser's school days and the author concludes that the facts set forth (probably untrue) show that the Kaiser as a boy had the "root of a fine character in him," possessed "that chivalrous sense of fair play which is the nearest thing to a religion" in boys of that age and hated "meanness and favouritism." The Chicago Board of Education end the eulogy by stating, "There is in him a fundamental bent toward what is clean, manly and aboveboard."
"Chivalrous sense of fair play and hates meanness!" "Fundamental bent toward what is clean, manly and aboveboard!" How about the enslavement of women and girls in France, the use of poison gas, the deportations of the Belgians, the sinking of theLusitaniaand the killing of women and babies by Zeppelins and submarines.—Sickening!
A number of the books used in the public schools of New York have so much in them favourable to kings and emperors, have so much of German patriotism and fatherland, that the hand of the propagandist must have had something to do with the adoption of these books.
Of course, it is only in the books of the advanced courses that propaganda appears. It is not possible, however clever the author, to incorporate much propaganda in simple exercises, or in such sentencesas "Have you seen the sister of my cousin's wife?" or "The bird is waiting in the blacksmith shop on account of the rain."
But the following extracts from books used in the public schools of New York should not be without interest to those who know that the impressions given to persons under the age of sixteen or seventeen are the impressions that often persist through life.
For instance in the "Deutscher Lehrgang, First Year," by E. Prokosch of the University of Texas, "Die Wacht am Rhein" is printed with music.
I should be very much surprised to hear that the "Star Spangled Banner," with music, had ever been printed in any school book in Germany.
On page 109, of this book, there is an article in German entitled, "The German Constitution." It begins with the sentence, "The German Empire is a union State like the United States of America." How far the German Empire is from the United States of America in political liberty can be answered by any German immigrant or Jewish merchant who has voted under the circle system or been denied access to court because of his religion!
The second paragraph commences with the sentence, "The German Kaiser is not monarch of the Empire. He only is President of the Union." I am quite sure that if the Kaiser ever saw this sentence he would very soon convince the author that he was something more than the President. The article continues:
"He is the over-commander of the army.Through him is war declared and peace made, but he can declare war only with the consent of the Bundesrath."
The Bundesrath had nothing to say about the commencement of this war. They never voted on the question. The German Constitution, as a matter of fact, gives the Kaiser the right to declare war himself, providing that the war is a defensive war. In 1914, the Kaiser first announced, without presenting any evidence, that Germany had been attacked, and then declared war on the strength of this statement, never since substantiated.
The text book writer adds: "The people are represented in the Reichstag as the American people are represented in Congress." If the American people were represented in Congress under the same unfair representation from which the German people suffer, there would soon be a revolution in this country. The districts which elect members to the Reichstag have not been changed since 1872, so that millions of Germans are not represented at all in the Reichstag.
"Professor" Prokosch remarks: "The Bundesrath is like the Senate of the United States. It is composed of representatives of the particular States."
Of course, the onlydifferenceis that our Senators are elected by the people and the members of the Bundesrath are appointed by the ruling kings and princes of the German states and vote exactly as they are told by these rulers.
This is only to show how carelessly, if not maliciously,Professor E. Prokosch of the University of Texas and his helper, C. M. Purin of the State Normal School at Milwaukee, have handled the German Constitution, doubtless to give the impression to school children in America that the German empire instead of being a despotic autocracy, is ruled in very much the same manner as our own republic.
Frederick the Great, who admitted that he went to war "in order to be talked about," who boasted that he had only one cook and a hundred spies, who was one of the most tyrannical kings of all history, has a whole book dedicated to him for use in the Public Schools of New York. Frederick Betz, head of the Department of Modern Languages in the East High School of Rochester, New York, is the author of a book called, "About a Great King and Others." The author in the preface states that the anecdotes which he prints do not narrate the story of the lives of these famous Germans, but, nevertheless, give glimpses of what they did and may help to show why the Germans held them in such high esteem. The book contains four anecdotes about King Frederick William I, the father of Frederick the Great, a villainous king who was prevented from executing his own son only by the protests of the other kings of Europe.
Then follow forty-nine anecdotes about Frederick the Great, all of them, of course, revealing him as a good king and a popular character; eight anecdotes about Beethoven, Mozart, Schiller, and Lessing, and the remainder of the book is made up ofone anecdote about Queen Louise, one about Field Marshal Blücher, eighteen anecdotes about Bismarck, three about the Emperor William I, and three about the present Emperor.
The booklet entitled "German Poems for Memorizing," with music to some of the poems, edited by Oscar Burkhard, Assistant Professor of German in the University of Minnesota, contains a number of German patriotic poems and prints the "Wacht am Rhein" twice, once in the text and once with music. "Deutschland über Alles" is printed twice in the same way.
I should like to be present at the trial in the secret court in Germany of a schoolmaster who dared to teach his pupils to sing the "Star Spangled Banner" or the "Battle Hymn of the Republic." Prokosch and Purin seem to be popular with the Board of Education, for they are represented by another book called "Conversation and Reading Book," which is full of stories and patriotic anecdotes. Charlemagne, Barbarossa and Frederick the Great are all exhibited as great men to be emulated. There is a picture of the coronation of Charlemagne which represents the Pope about to place the iron crown on Charlemagne's head while the Deity, attended by seraphim and cherubim, floating on clouds overhead, lends his presence to the ceremony; only another example of how the Prussians believe that God is the tribal Deity of their nation who takes a personal interest in all their ceremonies and wars.
A long article appears in these books entitled, "The Germans in the United States." It impliesthat William Penn had no success until he called in Dr. Daniel Pastorius of Frankfort. Among the bits of history set forth the author alleges that, in 1760, there were more than a hundred thousand Germans in Pennsylvania, and that on account of their importance in this State it was proposed to make German the official language, the proposition being beaten by only one vote! The article says further: "The only reason why the contentious Puritans succeeded in making English the language of the country and in impressing their character on its politics was because the German immigrants were poor, downtrodden people."
But it is when we come to the description of the War of the Revolution and other wars that the authors really turn loose. We learn that Washington's bodyguard was composed of Germans and that Baron von Steuben apparently reorganised the American army, so that Washington moved Congress to name General von Steuben, Inspector General, and to make his position almost independent. The writers say that the siege of Yorktown and surrender of the English army was in a great part the work of Steuben.
I think that other historians might have something to say on this subject. The authors fail to tell that Baron von Steuben, a soldier of fortune, who sold his services to the highest bidder, was hired to join the American army by a Frenchman, Beaumarchais, who sympathised with the United States.
Attention is also called to the fact that 190,000Germans fought against the South and the authors observe in conclusion:
"If to-day the United States of America is a power of world political importance, if its industry, agriculture and commerce betoken a powerful danger commercially over the old Europe, so have they to thank the political power and the methodical perseverance of the Anglo-Saxon immigrants from England as well as the industry, the bravery and the cheerfulness of the Germans who have placed themselves politically in the service of the Anglo Saxons."
"If to-day the United States of America is a power of world political importance, if its industry, agriculture and commerce betoken a powerful danger commercially over the old Europe, so have they to thank the political power and the methodical perseverance of the Anglo-Saxon immigrants from England as well as the industry, the bravery and the cheerfulness of the Germans who have placed themselves politically in the service of the Anglo Saxons."
It is noteworthy that of the four books I have set forth as examples, three apparently have been produced since the commencement of the World War.
Does not all this show the hand of the German propaganda—the same hand which sends from Berlin every year a large sum of money to the German colonists in the southern states of Brazil in order that the German schools may be maintained there, German ideas inculcated and the population prevented from losing its German identity?
From the time of the visit of Prince Henry to this country the German system of propaganda has been at work smoothing out traditional differences and feuds between Germans and doing its best to make Germans from Bavaria, Saxony and Hanover and Württemberg, and Hesse forget that their countries were conquered by the Prussians in 1866.
When Prince Henry was here on his trip through the country he spent very little time with Americans.He was chiefly occupied with German-Americans and German-American Societies.
Prince Henry's visit to the United States in 1902 was primarily to attend the christening of the racing yacht of the Emperor which was being built in this country. One of the members of his suite was von Tirpitz, then secretary of state of the German Navy. After having been officially received by President Roosevelt he visited Annapolis, Brooklyn Navy Yard and West Point and then toured the middle west stopping at twenty cities between New York and St. Louis. During the entire trip he continually asked questions of all the delegates sent with him by the U. S. Government, such as for instance facts about the shops at Altoona, the coal mines, farms, factories and handsome women!
At every station he was met by the Mayor of the city and the German Societies, and greeted with German music. The Deutscher Kriege Verein, a German Society consisting of military veterans, always had a place of honour in the celebrations. In many cities the German-American citizens gave the Prince albums or souvenirs in which were engraved pretty pledges of devotion to the Fatherland. For instance in Chicago, the German Roman Catholic Society presented the following address: "The German Roman Catholic Staats-Verband of Illinois begs your Royal Highness to permit it to express its great joy for your visit to the United States and to assure your Royal Highness of its respect and regard."
"We extend to your Royal Highness our heartiest greeting as the illustrious guest of this country andthe envoy of the wise and noble ruler of our Fatherland, whom the world recognises and respects as prince of peace and as the representative of a great and mighty nation that by its own power has united its people and achieved its present prominent position among nations of the earth."May the Almighty grant that the visit of your Royal Highness bear a rich fruit, that rulers and their people may join together and thereby promote peace, harmony and good-will throughout the world! May God grant this prayer!"
"We extend to your Royal Highness our heartiest greeting as the illustrious guest of this country andthe envoy of the wise and noble ruler of our Fatherland, whom the world recognises and respects as prince of peace and as the representative of a great and mighty nation that by its own power has united its people and achieved its present prominent position among nations of the earth.
"May the Almighty grant that the visit of your Royal Highness bear a rich fruit, that rulers and their people may join together and thereby promote peace, harmony and good-will throughout the world! May God grant this prayer!"
Everywhere the Prince went he was surrounded by German-American and German influences. In St. Louis, where the Prince spent about three and a half hours, the German-Americans gave him a great reception in the Grand Hall and lunch at the St. Louis Club which was attended by many Germans. In Chicago, a reception was given after the Mayor's banquet, in the First Regiment Armory, and attended by ten thousand Germans. The following day in Chicago he went to a large luncheon at the Germania Club. In Milwaukee the officers of the Deutscher Kriegebund gave a reception at the Exposition where ten thousand German-Americans cheered the Prince, and also a luncheon at the Hotel Pfister where many German-American officials were invited.
The speeches throughout had the same tone, those of the German-Americans expressing their respectfor the Fatherland and those of the Prince spurring on loyalty in the hearts of the German-Americans. The Prince's speech in the Armory in Chicago is quite typical. In reply to a speech made by a German-American, the Prince said:
"You have left your Fatherland, but if you still have some love for the Fatherland then I ask you to give three cheers for the one who has sent me here as the representative of Prussia to bring this greeting—the German Emperor and King of Prussia."
In another speech which the Prince began with "Mr. Chairman and Fellow-Germans," he said: "I would like to say that the Germans in this country have done a great deal for the literature and science of this country and I hope they will continue in this good work." The whole attitude of the Prince seemed to be one of benevolence to his "Fellow-Germans" and personal interest in them. Wherever the Prince discovered a German wearing the Iron Cross in the crowd, he would ask an aide to bring the man up to him so that he could shake hands and converse with him.
Talking with Prince Henry one day before the war he told me he regretted that on his trip to America he had seen so little of the Americans. He said: "You know the Ambassador kept me always with the Germans and German Societies." I suppose the poor Prince did not himself know what was the real object of his visit. But undoubtedly his shrewd trip manager and the clever propagandists who accompanied him knew only too well.
It is hard to understand why any German-Americans should take sides with German autocracy. There are many merchants of Frankfort and Hamburg and Bremen and the great industrial towns of Germany who do not approve of the cruelties practised in this war and many of these will leave Germany as soon as peace is concluded.
Any one had a right to sympathise, to side with Germany, before our entrance into the war. But now what the lawyers call "the time of repentance" has gone by, there is no middle course and every citizen must declare himself American or be thought a traitor.
It is hard to understand what the pro-Germans in our country want. They left Germany because of a lack of opportunity there, because of their dislike for military service under Prussian conditions, because of the caste system which kept them under the heel of autocracy and because here every avenue of business, and social and political advancement is thrown wide open for them and their children. And I am quite sure that if one of these prosperous Germans were deprived of the money that he has won here, given back the rags and wooden shoes in which he landed and told that he was on his way to Germany, no wild animal in all the mountains and swamps of the United States would scratch and bite and kick and squawk more vigorously than he would. These German-Americans do not want to be sent back to their Kaiser and their fatherland!
Certainly we Americans will not stop the war nor surrender our rights nor invite the invasion ofour shores because of their stubborn devotion to a country which they were so glad to abandon. We must appeal to their sons and their daughters—to those who have become part and parcel of our nation, to see that these obstinate old codgers do not persist in an attitude which may end in creating a prejudice against those of German descent in America.
Those of us who are of Scotch or Irish or English descent can urge this with greater insistence because our ancestors were much nearer, in 1766, to the English fatherland, than German-Americans are to the German Empire and these ancestors did not hesitate in that year to turn against Great Britain on a mere question of commerce—did not hesitate again, in 1812, to face Great Britain in arms on a question of sea rights; and on account of this we expect all those of German-American descent to stand unreservedly by their adopted country,—forced into war by an autocracy that not only murdered our women and children in defiance of international law and common humanity but which threatens, if successful in this war, to invade our shores.
Do these stubborn German-Americans think that if a German force should occupy America their position would be any better than that of the other citizens of this country, that they would be put to rule over the rest of us and allowed to save their goods and houses from the indemnities that would be put upon this nation in case of our defeat?
Let me tell them one thing and that is, if by anyremote possibility the Germans did gain a foothold in this country through the aid of those of German descent here, before we, of other descent in this country submitted to German rule we would attend to every traitor!
We did not lure any citizens of foreign nations to our shores. They came here to escape serfdom and starvation and forced military service in an army where they could never be officers. We sent them no excursion tickets when they came here as half-starved peasants. We opened to them the doors of hospitality and of opportunity, and we do not propose that they shall pay us like the frozen snake in Æsop's fables.
Some of our finest citizens came from Germany in 1848 after the failure of the revolution against autocracy. Where do you think that General Siegel and Carl Schurz would stand if they were alive to-day?
The daughter of General Siegel has answered in giving her son, on whom she was dependent, to the army of the United States, saying, "His grandfather fought under Lincoln for liberty and he must take his place to-day in the great fight for freedom."
We are too good-natured, too soft, too easy in this country. Our great ex-President, that splendid American and patriot, Theodore Roosevelt, said not long ago of one of our United States Senators, if that Senator were a German and acted in Germany the way he acted in America as an American he would be put at digging a trench. I do not liketo differ with Theodore Roosevelt, but from my knowledge of German conditions during this war, I know that if this Senator acted as a German in Germany as he has been acting as an American in America, he would not be put by the Germans at digging a trench but that with the ten bullets of a firing squad in his chest he would be filling one!
Are these Germans in America imbued with the belief that the German Kaiser has been sent by heaven to rule the German Empire and bend the world under German "Kultur"? President Wilson, in one of his notes in 1916, referred to the German government as "the mouthpiece of the people." A German conservative newspaper, I think theTages Zeitung, commenting upon this said that "the German Emperor is not our 'mouthpiece' but our truly beloved Emperor sent to us by God."
Does the German-American ever stop to consider how the Hohenzollerns obtained possession of the Mark of Brandenburg, the basis of modern Prussia? Five hundred years ago the Hohenzollerns were Counts of Nuremberg, then as now a rich trading city. Sigismund III wanted ready money and this was advanced by the Hohenzollerns, Counts of Nuremberg, on the security of the mark of Brandenburg pledged as collateral to the loan which totalled only $100,000. Later the Counts of Nuremberg foreclosed their mortgage and took possession of the Mark of Brandenburg and have held it ever since.
Does a German-American in this country who has placed a mortgage on his house think when hefails to pay the interest or principal of the mortgage that the man who has sold him out was sent by God?
This calls to mind one of the great failures of the war—the failure of religion in the German Empire. I attended a great service, in the Protestant cathedral of Berlin, held to celebrate the five hundredth anniversary of the occasion when the first Hohenzollern, having foreclosed his mortgage, entered into possession of Brandenburg. The Emperor sat in an elevated gallery and across the great cathedral Dr. Dryander, the Court preacher, mounted the pulpit to deliver an eulogy on the Hohenzollern rule and the Hohenzollerns.
What an opportunity then if Dr. Dryander, lifting an accusing finger, had spoken of the rivers of innocent blood sacrificed to the Prussian Moloch of conquest, if he had demanded in the name of Christianity that the barbarities of Prussian rule should cease, that the Belgian workingmen, dragged from their homes to manufacture shells to be used against their own brothers, sons and fathers in Prussian factories, should be sent back; if he had demanded that the twenty thousand women and girls driven into worse than slavery from Lille and Tourcoing and Roubaix in the North of France should be given their freedom once more; if he had spoken of the whole nation of the Armenians, of the Syrians, of the Jews, massacred by the Turks while the German Generals in command of the Turkish armies stood by; if he had denounced the invasion of Belgium, the breaking of treaties, the starvationof Poland, the horrors of poisoned gas and the cruelties exercised upon those of the opposing armies unfortunate enough to become prisoners of the Germans.
But no, Dr. Dryander droned on. No pastor in Germany has dared to risk his state-paid salary to stand up for Christianity and the right.
The Prussians cannot get away from the belief that they have a sort of personal God who takes a direct and kindly interest in their destinies, especially in the ordering of their bloody battles. Countless sermons were preached through Germany during the war, but the most ridiculous was that of a Protestant pastor in Berlin early in the war. He announced the title of his sermon as, "Is God neutral?", and in his fourteenthly proved to his own satisfaction, that the Deity, abandoning neutrality, had declared Himself unequivocally for the success of German arms!
Afterthe appearance, in August, 1917, in thePhiladelphia Public Ledgerand other newspapers in America and theTelegraphin England of the message of the Kaiser to President Wilson, the officialNorth German Gazette, evidently unaware of the fact that the original message of the Kaiser in his own hand was in my possession, published the following:
"TheLondon Daily Telegraphpublishes from the memoirs of former Ambassador Gerard a telegram that His Majesty the Kaiser is alleged to have sent to President Wilson on August 10, 1914, and in which the events before the participation of England in the present war are set forth."We are, in these circumstances, in the positionTO GIVE THE ASSURANCE THAT A TELEGRAM OF THE KAISER OF THIS NATURE DOES NOT EXIST."It is correct that an audience was granted to Ambassador Gerard on August 10, 1914, in order to give the opportunity to spread before His Majesty the peace mediation offer of President Wilson."The personal message of President Wilson to the Kaiser runs as follows: 'As official head of one of the Powers which signed the Hague Convention, I feel according to Article III of this Convention it is my rightand my duty to declare to you in the spirit of the truest friendship that I would welcome every opportunity to act in the interest of the peace of Europe whether now or at another more fitting time....'"This proposition came at a time when the opposing armies had already crossed the frontiers and when it seemed out of the question to halt the march of events."His Majesty could, therefore, only transmit to the President his thanks for the mediation offered and to add thereto that it was too early for the mediation of a neutral Power, but that later the friendly proposition of President Wilson could be taken up again."His Majesty, the Emperor, then talked for some time with the American Ambassador and set forth to him separately the events which led to the outbreak of the war. Particularly did the Kaiser call attention to the equivocal and unloyal position of England which had destroyed the hope of a peaceful issue."The setting forth by Ambassador Gerard in his memoirs seems to be a contradiction of this conversation."If the press of enemy countries sees revelations in this that only shows that they are not acquainted with the German White Book which sets forth these events."Possibly, during the interviews, the Emperor wrote down notes for the Ambassador, in order that the latter should not send anything incorrect to Washington. In this case we have to do only with certain notes to aid the memory of the Ambassador, not with a communication of the Emperor to President Wilson."
"TheLondon Daily Telegraphpublishes from the memoirs of former Ambassador Gerard a telegram that His Majesty the Kaiser is alleged to have sent to President Wilson on August 10, 1914, and in which the events before the participation of England in the present war are set forth.
"We are, in these circumstances, in the positionTO GIVE THE ASSURANCE THAT A TELEGRAM OF THE KAISER OF THIS NATURE DOES NOT EXIST.
"It is correct that an audience was granted to Ambassador Gerard on August 10, 1914, in order to give the opportunity to spread before His Majesty the peace mediation offer of President Wilson.
"The personal message of President Wilson to the Kaiser runs as follows: 'As official head of one of the Powers which signed the Hague Convention, I feel according to Article III of this Convention it is my rightand my duty to declare to you in the spirit of the truest friendship that I would welcome every opportunity to act in the interest of the peace of Europe whether now or at another more fitting time....'
"This proposition came at a time when the opposing armies had already crossed the frontiers and when it seemed out of the question to halt the march of events.
"His Majesty could, therefore, only transmit to the President his thanks for the mediation offered and to add thereto that it was too early for the mediation of a neutral Power, but that later the friendly proposition of President Wilson could be taken up again.
"His Majesty, the Emperor, then talked for some time with the American Ambassador and set forth to him separately the events which led to the outbreak of the war. Particularly did the Kaiser call attention to the equivocal and unloyal position of England which had destroyed the hope of a peaceful issue.
"The setting forth by Ambassador Gerard in his memoirs seems to be a contradiction of this conversation.
"If the press of enemy countries sees revelations in this that only shows that they are not acquainted with the German White Book which sets forth these events.
"Possibly, during the interviews, the Emperor wrote down notes for the Ambassador, in order that the latter should not send anything incorrect to Washington. In this case we have to do only with certain notes to aid the memory of the Ambassador, not with a communication of the Emperor to President Wilson."
TheTageblattreprinted this lame and silly explanation in its issue of August 13, 1917, and complained that, although its correspondent at the Hague sent, on August 7, 1917, this part of myfirst book in a telegram, only on August 11, did the Government permit the delivery to theTageblattof this story from the correspondent. Then the newspaper despatch had to be submitted to the Censorship officials who only released it for publication at midnight. TheTageblattsays, "The form of the explanation which has now appeared in theNorth German Gazettecan hardly be called very happy. What does this mean—'possibly during the interview the Kaiser wrote down notes for the Ambassador in order that the latter should not send anything incorrect to Washington'? Now, after a week the occurrence must have been fathomed and it was not necessary to make use of a 'possibly.' Could Mr. Gerard consider these 'notes' in the handwriting of the Emperor as a draft for a telegram? And do these notes read, as a telegram of the Emperor to Wilson—as Mr. Gerard repeats them?"
Does not theTageblattarticle give a glimpse not only of how the newspapers of Germany are hampered and censored, but of the positively glorious incompetency of the Government officials who denied the existence of an original document in the Kaiser's own hand which the most elementary inquiries in their own circle would have disclosed not only was in existence but in my possession?
The redoubtable Reventlow writing in the ConservativeTages Zeitungcommented as follows:
"Kaiser William had possibly for his answer written down notes and given them to Gerard, but these wereonly helps for Gerard's memory and it was not a question of a direct communication of the German Kaiser to the President. In accordance with the Gerard reports it now seems that nevertheless the Ambassador telegraphed the Imperial notes immediately and literally to Washington. Mr. Gerard has, therefore, again in this respect lied, which is not surprising."
"Kaiser William had possibly for his answer written down notes and given them to Gerard, but these wereonly helps for Gerard's memory and it was not a question of a direct communication of the German Kaiser to the President. In accordance with the Gerard reports it now seems that nevertheless the Ambassador telegraphed the Imperial notes immediately and literally to Washington. Mr. Gerard has, therefore, again in this respect lied, which is not surprising."
Reventlow, of course, had not then seen the facsimile of the Kaiser's telegram which is headed in his own hand "To the President, personally."
Later the other German newspapers took the Foreign Office to task for making such a weak denial of an incontrovertible fact. And note the charming parliamentary language of dear old Reventlow!
The article, which appeared in theTages Zeitungof August 14th last, is interesting because Reventlow is without doubt the oracle and mouthpiece of the Prussian Conservatives. He continues to attack me in this article but much of the attack is in reality praise, and, as we say in expressive slang, "every knock is a boost." The article continues:
"It is very desirable to know if the former Chancellor was present at the audience; it is regrettably not inconceivable, but is a new proof of the incompetence of the Chancellor, that he did not, according to his duty, inform his Imperial Lord of the political personality and character of a man like Gerard."In the U-boat crisis Mr. Gerard had been able to play a quite decisive part. He was like Mr. von Bethmann-Hollweg entirely of the view that the German Empire must give in to the demands of the United States and constantly showed himself wonderfully informedabout what step each inner circle would for the moment take."The influence of Mr. Gerard is all the more a shameful and heavy reproach for the official leadership of Mr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, since this American Ambassador, while an intriguer, was not a personality."But when Gerard said anything, wished anything or threatened anything, that imported always a fear-exciting event, and he was finally sly enough to seize and use this halo to the limit. That a man like Gerard has been able through all these years to win and keep such a position and such an influence over German affairs is without example."
"It is very desirable to know if the former Chancellor was present at the audience; it is regrettably not inconceivable, but is a new proof of the incompetence of the Chancellor, that he did not, according to his duty, inform his Imperial Lord of the political personality and character of a man like Gerard.
"In the U-boat crisis Mr. Gerard had been able to play a quite decisive part. He was like Mr. von Bethmann-Hollweg entirely of the view that the German Empire must give in to the demands of the United States and constantly showed himself wonderfully informedabout what step each inner circle would for the moment take.
"The influence of Mr. Gerard is all the more a shameful and heavy reproach for the official leadership of Mr. von Bethmann-Hollweg, since this American Ambassador, while an intriguer, was not a personality.
"But when Gerard said anything, wished anything or threatened anything, that imported always a fear-exciting event, and he was finally sly enough to seize and use this halo to the limit. That a man like Gerard has been able through all these years to win and keep such a position and such an influence over German affairs is without example."
But I must really put aside the halo which Reventlow so graciously hands me. While I was informed of what was going on, I certainly did my best to persuade Bethmann-Hollweg and von Jagow and Zimmermann as well as the Emperor and numberless others from defying America. If von Bethmann-Hollweg and any of the others were against ruthless submarine war, seeing that to adopt any other policy would bring America into this war, then they took this position because it seemed to them best for their country and history will prove them right.
Reventlow says further:
"In the winter of 1916-17 one dreamed already of loans and imports from the United States during the peace negotiations. Mr. Gerard came back from America with alms for the wounded and the result of his sublime patience and of the sublime patience of Mr. von Bethmann-Hollwegwas pictured by the Gerard celebration in Berlin."Then came the decision for ruthless submarine war. The first time in his ambassadorial service was Mr. Gerard surprised and the men who entertained him were also surprised for they dreamed of and wished for quite other things. It is incorrect, if it has been stated, that at the time of the Gerard celebration ruthless submarine war had already been agreed on. That came later."
"In the winter of 1916-17 one dreamed already of loans and imports from the United States during the peace negotiations. Mr. Gerard came back from America with alms for the wounded and the result of his sublime patience and of the sublime patience of Mr. von Bethmann-Hollwegwas pictured by the Gerard celebration in Berlin.
"Then came the decision for ruthless submarine war. The first time in his ambassadorial service was Mr. Gerard surprised and the men who entertained him were also surprised for they dreamed of and wished for quite other things. It is incorrect, if it has been stated, that at the time of the Gerard celebration ruthless submarine war had already been agreed on. That came later."
The Banquet
PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN AFTER THE BANQUET GIVEN AMBASSADOR GERARD IN BERLIN ON JANUARY 6TH, 1917. PROBABLY THE ORDERS FOR THE RESUMPTION OF "RECKLESS" SUBMARINE WAR HAD BEEN GIVEN WHEN THIS LOVE-FEAST TOOK PLACE.Sitting, left to right—Von Wermuth, Mayor of Berlin; Ambassador Gerard; Zimmermann; Von Sydow, Minister of Commerce.Standing, left to right—Unknown; Consul General Lay; Commander Gherardi, U. S. N.; First Secretary Grew; Unknown; Count Montgelas; Solf, Colonial Minister; General Friedrich, in charge of prisoners of war; Isaac Wolf, President of American Association of Commerce and Trade; John B. Jackson, former Minister to Cuba.
But I did know that ruthless submarine war was coming, knew of the orders given, and this is proved not only by my reports which are still secret, but by what I told not only many people in America but several editors who with my full approval published articles showing this belief.
I am obliged to Reventlow for what he says of me. I admire him as a powerful writer for whose ability I have a deep respect and perhaps if I were a Prussian Junker I would follow him as blindly and confidently as do the army and navy officers, the nobles, great and small, and the land-holding squires of Prussia, to whom his writings are as seductive as the pipings of the Pied Piper to the townsfolk of Hamlin.
Reventlow's charge of lying was made in the line of his duty as a Prussian Junker, according to the best traditions of Prussian government and diplomacy but it is so thoroughly disproved and the authenticity of the Kaiser's telegram so universally admitted in Germany, even in official circles there, that I feel only sorrow for a Prussian nobleman and Junker and editor compelled by the exigenciesof his position to make so ridiculous a statement.
I think that the Germans just now are beginning to realise that I always told them the truth and treated them fairly, a procedure, I admit, far more disconcerting and disturbing to them than the most subtle wiles and moves of the old diplomacy.
Von Bethmann denied that the peace terms as set forth in my book were his (he did not deny that they are the terms of the Junkers) and criticised me for "unethically" publishing an account of my experiences in Germany. This is what he said: