Evening Republican, Volume 22, Number 84, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 April 1919 — GIVES VIEWS ON PEACE PROBLEM [ARTICLE]

GIVES VIEWS ON PEACE PROBLEM

COL. GEORGE HEALEY URGES REPUBLICANS TO SUPPORT LEAGUE. An article of more than passing interest is taken from today’s Indianpolis Star insomuch as it contains the views of a former Rensselaer citizen, George H. Healey. The article follows: Washington, April 10.—From an Indiana soldier in France, who in civil life was a Republican newspaper publisher, comes an earnest appeal for Americans to accept and ratify the league of nations. He makes an especial appeal for Republicans to get behind the league. He urges that Republicans ..win the next election by “supporting the plan for peace” just as they won the last election by “supporting the policies that won the war.” The soldier-editor advocate of the league is Col. George H. Healey, infantry, now stationed at Chatilion-sur-Seine, France. He formerly was the publisher of the Republican at Rensselaer. Ind., and was active in the Indiana Republican Editorial .Association. In France, where he is removed from the political atmosphere and where he has witnessed the ravages of war, he is able to discuss the great league question free from the political prejudices that one may find here. In France he is in contact with American soldiers rather than politicians. His point of view is that of the soldier. His appeal for league support, contained in a letter written in France, March 7, is addressed primarily to Republicans. He is concerned lest they lose political advantage by not backing the league wholeheartedly. “I have contact over here with the thoughts of many who are to play a very vital part in the future policies of America. I may not present these thoughts forcefully and they may not be just as exact as others might portray them, but others may neglect doing it and I feel it a duty from the point of view of Americanism and Republicanism,” writes Col. Healey. “President Wilson is a master politician. He was re-elected on the proposition of keeping us out of war. If Democratic leaders did not see the necessity and the certainty of America eventually entering 'the war they had poor foresight. They must have seen it and yet they played it right into their favor. Germans in America voted for the he-kept-us-out-of war policy, pacifists voted for him, the tender plants of citizenship voted' for him. The country went to war and he organized all these elements into a unit to support a measure he was elected to prevent. He attempts to sense the aspirations of the people and his league of nations is an ideal that finally is going to be indorsed by' a great majority of our enlarged electorate. “The Republican part got behind the nation’s war program and gave whole-hearted support to every measure. The Republicans outdid the Democratic leaders in supporting the war. The people looked on and approved. Keen visioned, they realizthat there had been many Democratic blunders, and last November, the war still raging, the people elected Republican majorities in .branches of Congress. Why? Because they believed that the Republicans would 'put more vigor and force into the war and give better business management to the war than it was receiving. The election result was reassuring to Republicans, who Saw, as did many Democrats, the probability of Republican victory in 1920. “Theodore Roosevelt died. His counsel would have been most valuable. He was an international as well as a national figure. He would have commanded confidence at home and abroad. There ate not many men like him. I <l*o .not think •of

many} if any, at this time. “President Wilson, wielding a stick that makes the cudgel attributed to Roosvelt look like a watch charm, came to France unindorsed. England looked upon his coming with consternation, France with fear, Italy with complaisance and Germany with hope. None with expectation of adopting his views. But he soon had commanded the attention and s yP* port of the representatives of the allied nations and his views were put into world form. The views looked visionary at first to M. Clemenceau and Lloyd George, but they, too, listened to the sound waves of humanity and gave aid to their adoption. «. A * “Having secured the indorsement of. the American people by aiding the policy to win the war, the Republican party must not sacrifice that advantage by blockading the program for world peace. It must make no negative jaovement. lt must not permit a charge of obstruction. President Wilson ik a keener politician today than he was in 1916. Do not assume that his ambition is satisfied. He is confident in himself and is ready with powerful argument to test popular strength. Could an obstructionist hope for anything in such a contest? ‘*M the Republicans won the last election by supporting the policies that won the war, why not win the next election by supporting the plan that makes for peace? The peopi* want peace guarantees. The people will not tolerate opposition to the

ideals they hold, 'the league is right in principle, and details do not matter to the people. If 'brains like M. Clemenceau’s, Llqyd George’s and President Wilson’s and their associates from the several countries consider the league of nations sound it must be attacked only with some measure that is better. The plan will be well intrenched in the consciences of the voters, and if the Republican party decides to test its popularity it must have an unlimited supply of munitions and a big assured army of supporters when it goes over the top in 1920. And it should not start such a program unless it feels convinced that the league of nations is inimical to the United States. The party conscience must be clean. “The Republicans must give the peace program the support they gave the war program. They must give the people wihat they want. The people wanted to win the war and win it now; likewise they want peace and a league that will give some assurance of future peace. In 1920 the Republicans should be in position to say both that we'helped to win the war and that we have helped to establish world peace. “The Democratic party has failed on domestic matters. The Republicans will be in position to point out the blunders of the Democratic party in operating the railroads, si ezing the wires, permitting gross extravagance, giving latitude’to war profiteers, etc., yet the Republicans will be in a hole if the Democrats are permitted to say help establish world peace. The league of nations, of course, has no business in party politics. Constructive criticism is entirely proper, yet there should be hesitancy in giving the principle sought full and wholehearted indorsement and support. The league question will not be a i partisan question, will not be an issue, if Americans, without regard to party get behind the league. The Republicans can not afford to have

an issue. “The liberal vote is on. the increase. There, too, are an increasing number of women voters. The women are interested in something that they are told will assure world peace. So are independent voters. There are Democrats (I meet them among soldiers who' are disgusted with their party’s domestic policies and who would give to a Republican of big capacity, yet the Republicans, to win their vote, must, not go astray on this league question. Our Republican plans must be constructive and ideal, and our leader must be true to the plans. “Platforms that are made as scraps of paper are disastrous to their framers. We must build on ideals and practice the practical things of life that support those ideals. We must not have a candidate whose thought and expression have excluded the ideas for the betterment of humanity. Better a visipnary unknown who has plans for nation and world betterment than a candidate of national fame who has failed to do something really constructive for the cause of democracy. “Let the nation have from the Republican party a platform and a candidate that keeps abreast with the great pulsations of humanity. If it was love of justice that prompted our entrance into the war, surely that quality should be maintained in establishing justice now, “Prior to the European war, under less than two years of Democratic control, the United States was beginning to feel the result of a faulty tariff. Most voters understand the need for a protective tariff. But the tariff. Most voters understand the main thing is the living issue of world peace, a constructive platform and a constructively clean candidate.” -'Doubtless many of Col. Healey’s Indiana friends will be interested in knowing how to address him ip France. His most recent, address is A. P. 0. 730. American Expeditionary Fore.