he practice of secret negotiation with
apprehension as to what the effect would be upon the President's
influence and standing with the delegates to the Conference. I then
believed that he was taking a dangerous course which he would in the end
regret. So strong was this conviction that during a meeting, which the
President held with the American Commissioners on the evening of January
29, I told him bluntly--perhaps too bluntly from the point of view of
policy--that I considered the secret interviews which he was holding
with the European statesmen, where no witnesses were present, were
unwise, that he was far more successful in accomplishment and less
liable to be misunderstood if he confined his negotiating to the Council
of Ten, and that, furthermore, acting through the Council he would be
much less subject to public criticism. I supported these views with the
statement that the general secrecy, which was being practiced, was
making a very bad impression everywhere, and for that reason, if for no
other, I was opposed to it. The silence with which the President
received my remarks appeared to me significant of his attitude toward
this advice, and his subsequent continuance of secret methods without
change, unless it was to increase the secrecy, proved that our judgments
were not in accord on the subject. The only result of my
representations, it would seem, was to cause Mr. Wilson to realize that
I was not in sympathy with his way of conducting the negotiations. In
the circumstances I think now that it was a blunder on my part to have
stated my views so frankly.
Two days after I wrote the note, which is quoted (April 2, 1919), I made
another note more general in character, but in which appears the
following:
"Everywhere there are developing bitterness and resentment against a
secretiveness which is interpreted to mean failure. The patience of
the people is worn threadbare. Their temper has grown ragged. They
are sick of whispering diplomats.
"Muttered confidences, secret intrigues, and the tactics of the
'gum-shoer' are discredited. The world wants none of them these days.
It despises and loathes them. What the world asks are honest
declarations openly proclaimed. The statesman who seeks to gain his
end by tortuous and underground ways is foolish or badly advised. The
public man who is sly and secretive rather than frank and bold, whose
methods are devious rather than obvious, p
|