tial basis of the final settlement.

Such a pronouncement now by America would make a landmark in
history--would render a measureless service to the whole world in
emancipation from the persistent degradation of the twin doctrines that
might makes right, and that necessity knows no law, and would bring to
America herself imperishable honor and glory in the fearless assertion
and eternal consecration of her own noblest ideals.

I would submit further that such a national declaration by America
involves no violation of neutrality, and is in no sense inconsistent
with the spirit of official utterances already made.

To take the latter first--we have had notable utterances from the
President and from the ex-President.

President Wilson seems to have given a sympathetic hearing to the
mission which laid the case of Belgium before him, both as to the
violation of Belgium's neutrality and as to the cruel treatment of the
non-combatant population and the wanton destruction of towns and
villages and of precious historical monuments. He is understood to have
promised an investigation, and it is gathered from the Independance
Belge this week that this investigation has been, and is being, carried
out by American Military Attaches in Belgium, and also at the London
Embassy of the United States.

Again, President Wilson's recent letter to the Kaiser, while confirming
neutrality in precise terms, went on to intimate that there must be a
"day of settlement" and that "where injustices have found a place
results are sure to follow, and all those who have been found at fault
will have to answer for them." If the "general settlement" does not
sufficiently determine this, there is the ultimate sanction of "the
opinion of mankind" which will "in such cases interfere." He would
apparently reserve judgment until the end of the war, but in no way
disclaims or surrenders American responsibility.

Mr. Roosevelt is not tied by official responsibility, and can speak with
less restraint and more freedom. In The Outlook he has substantially
accepted and indorsed all that is material in the Belgian case.

America should help in securing a peace which will not mean the
"crushing the liberty and life of just and inoffending peoples or
consecrate the rule of militarism," but which "will, by international
agreement, minimize the chances of the recurrence of such worldwide
disaster," and "will, in the interests of civilization, create
conditions w