The Commoner
MARCH, 1916
ii
A Single Standard of Morality
In a speech to his Birmingham constituents,
delivered in 1858, John Bright, the great Eng
lish statesman, said:
" . . The moral law was not written for
men alone in their individual character, but it
was written as well for nations, and for nations
great as this of which we are citizens. If na
tions reject and deride that moral law, there is
a penalty which will inevitably follow. It may
not come at once, it may not come in our life
time; but, rely upon it, the great Italian is not
a poet only, but a prophet, when he says:
" 'The sword of Heaven is not in haste to smite,
Nor yet doth linger.' "
The rule for which Bright so eloquently
pleads is the ideal toward which the World has
been moving, all too slowly, but moving, for
centuries and the need for this single standard
of morality a standard applicable alike to in
dividuals and to nations is emphasized by every
war that stains the hands of man. It Is' tho su
premo international need at the present time.
The universally recognized standard of morals
for individuals is built upon the Ten Command
ments, and no one disputes tho validity of the
Commandments against killing, stealing, ' bear
ing 'false witness' and covetousness, when applied
to individuals; but theso commandments are
not sufficiently applied to the large groups, called
nations, and because they are not applied there
is no standard of morals which can be author
itatively invoked for the regulation of interna
tional affairs.
Men whose consciences would not permit them
to take a neighbor's life, as an individual act,
think it is entirely proper to take life by whole
sale, either through, those whom they command
or -at the command of others and that, too,
without regard td the cause of the war. Nations
which long since ceased to imprison their own
citizens for debt, do not hesitate to bombard
foreign cities and slaughter the inhabitants of
foreign countries as a means of enforcing the
ce-paymontof.j international loans r sometimes
loans okquestionablo validity. '
" Men who would not think of stealing from a
neighbor' are taught to believe that it is patriotic
to defend the taking of territory, if their nation
gains by tho act. Men who would shrink from
slandering a neighbor seem to feel no compunc
tions of conscience when they misrepresent the
purposes and plans of other nations; and covet
ousness, which is regarded as sinful in tho indi
vidual, seems to be transformed into a virtue
when it infects a nation. This attempt to limit
the application of these commandments to small
transactions has cost an enormous quantity of
blood and bas brought confusion into interna
tional councils.
Tho false philosophy which is responsible for
the blurring of the line -between right and wrong
in international affairs, is. the old, brutal, bar
barous doctrine that might makes rigit the
doctrine that a nation is at liberty to slezo what
ever it has the strength to sleze and to hold
whatever it has the power to hold. This doc
trine not only leads to cruelty and inhumanity
as between belligerents, but it leads to the ig
noring of the rights of neutrals. Belligerent
nations which make might the test of right, ex
alt "military necessity" to a position of supreme
importance and demands that neutral nations
submit to any dangers or damage that the bel
ligerent nations think will contribute to the suc
cess of belligerent arms.
International law is a series of precedents
and, since precedents relied upon are the wrongs
perpetrated, or the rights respected, by nations
at war, international law has the appearance of
being written upon the theory that war and not
peace Is the normal relation between nations.
The remedy for this very unsatisfactqry condi
tion is to be sought along Ave lines.
First, the substitution of arbitration for force
in the settlement of all differences which are ar
bitrable in character. The leading nations,
however, do not regard all questions as arbi
trable. For illustration, the most advanced ar
bitration treaties to which the United States is
a party contains four exceptions, viz., questions
of honor, of independence, of vital interests and
questions which affect the interests of third
parties.
Second, the investigation, by an international
tribunal, of all disputes which .are not declared
by treaty to be arbitrable. . This closes the gap
left by the arbitration treaties and leaves noth
ing which can become tho cause of war until
after a period of delay which gives opportunity
for passion to subside, for the separation of
questions of honor from questions of fact and for
the peace of tho estranged nations to bring their
influence to bear on their respective govern
ments. These treaties are framed upon the theory
that diplomacy, at its best, is tho art of keeping
cool. Man should deal with his fellows, not
when ho is angry, but when ho is calm.. When
he is angry he talks of what he can do, and
usually overestimates it; when ho is calm ho
thinks of what ho ought to do, and listens to
tho voico of conscience. Tho settlement of In
ternational disputes should, therefore, be post
poned until the parties can dispassionately con
sider the questions at issue.
Tho thirty treaties abovo mentioned, negoti
ated in 1914 and 1915, with governments. pxer
cizlng authority over three-fourths of tho in
habitants of the globe, contain throe provisions
which promise to make wars between thq con
tracting parties a remote possibility; first, they
'include disputes of every kind and charactor;
second, they allow a year's time for Investiga
tion and report; and, third, they pledge tho con
tracting nations not to declare war or begin hos
tilities until the investigation is concluded and
tho report made.
Third. It is not sufficient to provide tho ma
chinery for the preservation of peace. Much
depends upon tho tone of diplomatic communi
cations they may be persuasive or irritating.
When the moral code now recognized among in
dividuals becomes binding between nations, the
rules which make lifetime attachments possible
between neighbors will be followed in the chan
cellories of tho world and the threat and the ul
timatum will give way to the maxim: Nothing Is
final between friends.
Fourth. Back of this change in the language
of diplomacy must be a change in the dominant
national thought a change which can not come
until limitations are no longer placed upon the
operation of moral principles. The individual,
if his ideals are worthy, is as careful to respect
the rights of others as ho is to enforce his own
rights, and it is this respect for the rights of
others that makes neighborhood peace possible.
The same scrupulous regard for the rights of
other nations will go far toward promoting in
ternational peace. Respect for tho rights of
others requires a higher form of courage than is
required for the enforcement of one's own
rights, and the heroism 'of self-restraint is su
perior, therefore to the heroism of conquest. "He
that is slow to anger is better than the mighty;
and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh
a city."
Fifth. Still more fundamental in building a
permanent peace is the spirit of brotherhood.
Love, and love only, can take man from the
"tooth and claw" class, make him conscious of
kinship with all the race and conform his con
duct to the Golden Rule. It is this, and this
only, that will make it possible to plan for a
limitless period of peace, with a nearer and
nearer approach toward perfect justice. This is
the solid rock "all else is shifting sand."
Carlyle, in the closing chapter of his French
Revolution, presents this philosophy when he
says:
"Hast thou considered how Thought Is strong
er than artillery parks, and (were It fifty years
after death and martyrdom, or were It two thou
sand years) writes and unwrites acts of Parlia
ment, removes mountains; models the world like
soft clay? Also how tho beginning of all
Thought, worth the name, is love?"
International relations, like all other human
relations, rest on moral philosophy, and, In con
structing an ethical code for the direction of
governments in their dealings with each other,
we must begin with a sense of kinship the
spirit of brotherhood.
Obedience to the injunction, "Thou shalt love
thy neighbor as thyself" will lead to self-restraint;
indeed, the motive for wrong doing be
ing removed, self-restraint will become easy.
Then nations will be as careful to avoid doing
injustice as they are now to enforce what they
calltheir rights, but which are sometimes mere
selfish interests, sometimes the promptings of
r brutal Instincts and sometimes the supposed re
quirements of & false standard of . morality.
When love is on the throne, nations will accept
tho measure of greatness to which the individual
is expected to conform and seek to cultivate re
spect, not by exciting fear, but by rendering
service.
Love, tho wisest of instructors, will also soften
tho languago of diplomacy, purge it of ' the
phrases that intiraato a resort to forco, infune
into it tho living spirit of good will and make it
an irresistablo power for tho promotion of
peace.
Tho lasting friendships, not formal but real,
thus created will lead us to investigate with
fairness all disputes which may arise and, con
stantly enlarging tho number of controversies
which can bo submitted to arbitration, finally
include ALL and usher in tho day for which
tho Christian world has so long prayed, whon
"They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation
shall not lift up sword against nation, neither
shall thoy loarn war any more."
W. J. BRYAN.
FOR THE CAUSE OF PEACH
Stanford University, January 6, 191C. Dr.
John J. Mullownoy, of Paxtang, Pa., a young
man, a member of tho Society of Friends, has
compiled a peaco calendar which has been re
ceived with great favor as the best of Its kind
which has yet nppcarcd, tho selections repre
senting many of tho very host things that have
ever been said in favor of the reign of law, se
curity and peaco.
Unfortunately, and without realizing that a
calendar is a perishable commodity, Dr. Mullow
ney contracted with tho publishers to sell a
very largo number of copies himself. Tho cal
endars were not received until tho first of De
comber, and it has been Impossible for him to
sell tho stipulated number. This has thrown a
vory heavy financial burden on a man not ready
to bear It. v
This Is to ask tho friends of peace into whose
hands this letter may fall to buy ono or more of
these calendars, worthy of space In any library,
for tho sako of the cause and for the sako of re
lieving a burden undertaken purely In tho inter
ests of peace. Very truly yours,
CSigned) DAVID STARR JORDAN.
(Contributions for tho purposo of placing
theso "Educationally wlso" calendars in the
public schools may bo sent to Miss A. Carter,
Secretary of tho Friends Philanthropic Work,
1305 Arch Street, Philadelphia. The Calendars
cost just 50c each in San Francisco, whero thoy
wero published.)
Republican campaign orators who-charge that
tho deficit in tho treasury was due to tho dem
ocratic tariff law will not quote any figures to
prove tho contention. Tho reason is that the
figures prove that the law, which also carries an
Income tax provision and increased the corpora
tion taxes, produced more revenue than did the
Payne law. The customs revenue fell off from
$313,891,395 tho last year of tho Payne law to
$292,128,527 the first year of the democratic
law, but there was an Increase of 4 millions In
the corporation tax collection and $41,046,102
new taxes from the" income tax law. Tho rev
enues, therefore, were 37 million dollars greater
under the democratic law, until the war came to
halt the import trade. Since then comparisons
'are impossible.
Two million dollars' worth of products from
tho munition making and powder mills of the
United States Is being sold each day to the bel
ligerents of Europe, at prices that give enor
'mous profits. When tho war comes to an end
tho mills will still bo running, but there will be
no buyers unless by that time the United States
has been frightened into adopting a strong mil
itary program. And yet somo people grow angry
when it is suggested that the war material
makers are so anxious to find a continuous mar
ket that they are back of much of the prepared
ness agitation.
Not one of the many church societies and la
bor organization that have held conventions
within tho last few months, since tho prepared
ness hysteria seized upon a part of the "people
has passed resolutions in favor of making this
an armed nation with large navies patrolling
its coasts. On the contrary many off them have
declared their most solemn antagonism to this
reversal of national policy. Yet soiie persons
delnde themselves into the belief that, the plain
people of this country are for doubling or quad
rupling the appropriations for national armament.