adopted in Belgium and France, and
threatened in England, if the opportunity arises, is undisguised
terrorism, and not war.

It is important to note also that at Brussels in 1874 Antwerp addressed
a petition to the conference praying that any bombardment should be
limited to fortifications only. The commission of the conference, which
included three well-known German Generals and two professors, recognized
the justice of this plea and recommended Generals to conform to it.

But the one point that should appeal most strongly to the patriotism as
well as the idealism of America is the fact that the instructions of
1863 for armies in campaign, drawn up by the United States Government
in the height of the civil war, first codified the laws for the conduct
of war, and have been the source and starting point of all these later
international agreements.

And it should be remembered that both Germany and America signed the
Fourth Convention of The Hague with its annexed regulations as to sieges
and bombardments (Articles 22 to 28) and the further provision which may
even yet be applied punitively to the proceedings of the present war.
"The belligerent who shall have violated the provisions of the said
regulation shall be held liable for an indemnity."

And if it be thought that America can render no help in such a position
as the present without violating her neutrality, the answer is that by
Article 3 of Convention 1 of The Hague, 1907, neutral powers have the
right to offer their suggestions (bons offices) or their mediation, even
during the course of hostilities. And further: "The exercise of this
right must never be considered by one or the other of the parties to
the conflict as an unfriendly act."

With all submission, I earnestly urge on the leaders of American thought
to support this attempted interpretation of the supreme duty and the
noble opportunity the present position places before their country.

One more word. I referred to the possible benefit of neutrality being
maintained while this protest against wrong and appeal for right is at
the same time advanced.

Is it not more than probable that there is an immense section of
moderate though patriotic opinion in the great German people which at
heart deprecates the extreme doctrines of conquest and world supremacy
in pursuit of which the great, the wonderful achievements of the German
race in science, in industry, in the extension of commerce, are being
ras