ople have so large a share in the life of America, a war doubly
unwelcome at all times because of the innumerable links of science,
invention, professional training, of commerce, and of personal
friendship; but there is also the local question of peace and good-will
in the daily work of America as between huge sections of her population.
These visible facts not unnaturally give great weight to the argument
for neutrality. No wise man on this side of the Atlantic will try to
ignore them, or take exception to the dignity and correctness with which
the American Executive has dealt with the grave problem before it.

Neutrality has, of course, its limits and conditions, logical and moral.
Those limits and conditions, the possibility of their infringement in
such a way as to make some change of policy imperative, are matters
solely for the United States.

The point the present writer wishes to press is on a different plane,
and is precisely this:

America does not and can not stand wholly apart from supreme European
decisions.

America is as responsible as Europe for the great extensions,
definitions, the strengthening and modification of international law.
America stands forth as the apostle of arbitration, to widen the area
within which disputed points may be determined amicably. America stands
also as the chief signatory of the great world conventions which have
settled new rules for the conduct of war, to mitigate its horrors,
especially for non-combatants.

America has taken a noble part in framing machinery for securing peace
and justice, and in moving forward the landmarks of civilization as
against savagery, and of human mercy as against cruel terrorism.

Can America safely or wisely divest herself of the duty thus placed upon
her, logically and morally, by her participation in this, the noblest
work of our age?

And is it wise or is it safe to indefinitely postpone the discharge of
this duty?

By the events of the last three months the whole of this new charter of
humanity has been challenged and is at stake.

Is it not sound policy as well as an imperative duty to take some step
here and now to "stop the rot" and to make good here and now as much as
we can of what we have won and wish to keep?

Belgium's Wrongs.

Admittedly a "guiltless and unoffending nation,"[1] whose neutrality and
independence had been solemnly guaranteed by treaty, to which the powers
concerned in the war were parties, has had h