We began that during the first winter of the war,
and it covered every phase of magazine and newspaper
publication.... We had at our disposal the services of
writers and scholars who made it possible for us to
find out, at any particular moment or crisis, special
information for articles about any event, place or
person.... The growth of the work of the British Bureau of
Information may be estimated by the fact that the working
force grew from a mere nine at the time of Mr. Balfour’s
installation of the office to fifty-four at the end of the
war.
For the entire two years of our participation in the war, and for a
period long antedating that event, the American people were under the
hypnosis of a propaganda conducted with serpent tongues and poisoned
pens by alien agents, spitting and hissing venom in the interest of
England and France. Mr. Tracy tells us that other means employed were
“war posters which went all over the country =and which are still
going=.”
The British Bureau of Information was the headquarters of “writers,
journalists and authors, dramatists and poets, who turned over to us
special articles or descriptions or pieces of art, to be relayed to
the periodicals.” And he adds: “There was also, perhaps most in the
public eye, the almost endless chain of English men and women who
came over during the war to speak under the auspices of the British
Government upon different aspects of the war. These did not include
the speakers and writers who came over here upon their own initiative
and for pecuniary benefit. We were not responsible for them. But we
did look after and =made arrangements for all the speakers who were
sent over by the Government. And they were legion!=”
These, in the estimation of Tracy, were as much a part of the
militant forces as the actual fighters, for he says: “No war in the
history of mankind has been fought with so many aids from the army
of intelligence, with so many pens and typewriters and cartooning
pencils conscripted in the same army with the line man, the tank and
the bird man.”
Need we be surprised that the last bulwark of resistance to this
insidious propaganda was swept away? How the British Bureau of
Information must have laughed in its sleeve and rejoiced when the
fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters of the 17,000 American boys of
German descent who bled in France were treated as criminal aliens in
their own country under the spell of the British propaganda?
The French propaganda bureau was busy in a similar manner. “The Dial”
of February 8, 1919, has this to say:
By 1916 the simple installation in the rear of the Quai
d’Orsay Ministry had evolved into the famous Maison de la
Presse, which occupied, with its many bureaus, a large
six-story building on the Rue Francois Premier. This was
one of the busiest hives of wartime Paris. There the
promising novelist, the art critic, the publicist, or the
well-recommended “belle chanteuse,” as well as the more
vulgar film operator and press agent, found directions
and material support for patriotic activities in the
“propagande.” From the Maison de la Presse were dispatched
to every neutral and entente nation select “missions.”
=The chief focus of all this Allied propaganda was the
United States=, especially Washington and New York,
though itinerant propagandists in every variety have
covered every section of the country. By this time the
English propaganda, also, was in full blast, under the
blunt leadership of Lord Northcliffe, with a Minister at
home--in the person of Lord Beaverbrook--all to itself.
In those days Fifth Avenue became a multi-colored parade
of Allied propaganda. One could scarcely dine without
meeting a fair propagandist or distinguished Frenchman or
titled Englishman (titles in war being chiefly for American
consumption!), or enter a theatre without suffering some
secret or overt stimulation from the propaganda, etc.
Chief of the French propagandists was Andre Cheradame, who, when
President Wilson at one time during the peace confab threatened to
bolt the conference, rose to the boldness of proposing to start a
conspiracy against him in his own country. According to the Paris “Le
Populaire,” early in 1919:
Cheradame, who was received and treated in a very
friendly way by Woodrow Wilson, moved that “highly paid
propagandists be sent at once to the United States to
get in touch with President Wilson’s opponents, in
particular with those who are members of the Senate, as the
Constitution of the United States gives that body power to
veto any treaty signed by the President.”
To this extent had the success of anti-German propaganda in our
country encouraged the agents of the French government! In the New
York “Evening Post” of March 3, 1919, David Lawrence, the regular
correspondent of that paper, then sojourning in Paris, speaks of
“propaganda bureaus, known to the public of America, however, as
‘bureaus of education’ or ‘committees on public information,’ are
conducted by most of the Allied governments in different parts of
the world.” He points out that in Paris the method largely followed
was that of bestowing social attention and decorations “on American
civilians to make them support all sorts of causes.”
The Vienna correspondent of the “Germania,” Berlin, writing the
latter part of June, 1919, refers to “the utterances of a French
general staff officer, who asserts that every intelligent person
in France knows that Germany did not desire the war. Germany could
not have wished anything better for herself than the preservation
of peace, but France was obliged to make propaganda for her own
cause, and it had served the purpose of gaining the accession of the
Americans.”
While English and French propaganda was thus conducted openly in
the American press, a Committee of the United States Senate headed
by Overman, was filling the newspapers with alarming accounts of
German propaganda--conducted before the United States declared war
on the Imperial German Government, the net result being a report
of glittering generalities accusing everybody indiscriminately and
convicting no one.
To what extent our own novelists, musical critics, film producers and
“belles chanteuse” were tainted, it is not intended to discuss in
this place. That some of our writers were hard put to find cause for
describing the German people as Huns, a menace to civilization and
a blot on humanity, is evidenced by a remarkable letter written to
the New York “Times” by Gertrude Atherton, one of the most outspoken
enemies of Germany, in the issue of July 6, 1915 (p. 8, cols. 7 and
8). Not to print it were an unpardonable omission, as it constitutes
an indictment of German civilization which none should miss reading.
She writes:
During the seven years that I lived in Munich, I learned
to like Germany better than any State in Europe. I liked
and admired the German people; I never suffered from an
act of rudeness, and I was never cheated of a penny. I was
not even taxed until a year before I left, because I made
no money out of the country and turned in a considerable
amount in the course of a year. When my maid went to the
Rathaus to pay my taxes (moderate enough), the official
apologized, saying that he had disliked to send me a bill,
but the increasing cost of the army compelled the country
to raise money in every way possible. This was in 1908. The
only disagreeable German I met was my landlord, and as we
always dodged each other in the house or turned an abrupt
corner to avoid encounter on the street, we steered clear
of friction. And he was the only landlord I had.
I left Munich with the greatest regret, and up to the
moment of the declaration of war I continued to like
Germany better than any country in the world except my own.
The reason I left was significant. I spent, as a rule,
seven or eight months in Munich, then a similar period in
the United States, unless I traveled. I always returned to
my apartment with such joy that when I arrived at night
I did not go to bed lest I forget in sleep how overjoyed
I was to get back to that stately and picturesque city,
so prodigal with every form of artistic and aesthetic
gratification.
But that was the trouble. For as long a time after my
return as it took to write the book I had in mind I worked
with the stored American energy I had within me; then for
months in spite of good resolutions, and some self-anathema
I did nothing. What was the use?
The beautiful German city, so full of artistic delight,
was made to live in, not to work in. The entire absence of
poverty in that city of half a million inhabitants alone
gave it an air of illusions, gave one the sense of being
the guest of a hospitable monarch who only asked to provide
a banquet for all that could appreciate. I look back upon
Munich as the romance of my life, the only place on this
globe that came near to satisfying every want of my nature.
And that is the reason why, in a sort of panic, I abruptly
pulled up stakes and left for good and all. It is not in
the true American idea to be content; it means running
to seed, a weakening of the will and the vital force. If
I remained too long in that lovely land--so admirably
governed that I could not have lost myself, or my cat,
had I possessed one--I should in no long course yield
utterly to a certain resentfully admitted tendency to
dream and drift and live for pure beauty; finally desert
my country with the comfortable reflection: Why all
this bustle, this desire to excel, to keep in the front
rank, to find pleasure in individual work, when so many
artistic achievements are ready-made for all to enjoy
without effort? For--here is the point--an American, the
American of to-day--accustomed to high speed, constant
energy, nervous tenseness, the uncertainty, and the fight,
cannot cultivate the leisurely German method, the almost
scientific and unpersonal spirit that informs every
profession and branch of art. It is our own way or none for
us Americans.
Therefore, loving Germany as I did, and with only the
most enchanting memories of her, if I had not immediately
permitted the American spirit to assert itself last August
and taken a hostile and definite stand against the German
idea (which includes, by the way, the permanent subjection
of women), I should have been a traitor, for I know out
of the menace I felt to my own future, as bound up with
an assured development under insidious influences, what
the future of my country, which stands for the only true
progress in the world today, and a far higher ideal of
mortal happiness than the most benevolent paternalism can
bestow, had in store for it, with Germany victorious, and
America (always profoundly moved by success, owing to her
very practicality) disturbed, but compelled to admire.
The Germans living here, destitute as their race seems to
be of psychology, when it comes to judging other races,
must know all this; so I say that they are traitors if they
have taken the oath of allegiance to the United States.
If they have not, and dream of returning one day to the
fatherland, then I have nothing to say, for there is no
better motto for any man than: “My country, right or wrong.”
The process of reasoning here plainly is: Germany is such a
well-governed, well-behaved, well-groomed, honest, beautiful,
seductive country that if I do not side with her enemies I shall fall
completely under her spell, and therefore, having left such a model
country, every German who comes to the United States to live must be
a traitor to America. Ingenious reasoning!
=Pitcher, Molly.=--Not only was Barbara Fritchie of German descent,
as shown elsewhere, but so also was the famous “Molly Pitcher” of
Revolutionary fame, whose story is known to every American patriot
as the woman who brought water to the fighting men in the battle
line in a large pitcher, to which she owed her name in history. Her
maiden name was Marie Ludwig, and she was born of good Palatine
stock October 13, 1754, in New Jersey. Her husband was John Hays, a
gunner, who was wounded at the battle of Monmouth. There being no man
available, Molly took his place and served the cannon so efficiently,
loading and firing with such dexterity, that after the battle
Washington appointed her to the rank of sergeant with a sergeant’s
pay.
=Press Attacks in Congress.=--Representative Calloway quoted in the
Congressional Record of February 9, 1917:
Mr. Chairman, under unanimous consent, I insert in the Record at this
point a statement showing the newspaper combination, which explains
their activity in this matter, just discussed by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Moore):
“In March, 1915, the J. P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding
and powder interests and their subsidiary organizations, got together
12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select
the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient
number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press of
the United States.
“These 12 men worked the problem out by selecting 179 newspapers, and
then began, by an elimination process, to retain only those necessary
for the purpose of controlling the general policy of the daily press
throughout the country. They found it was only necessary to purchase
the control of 25 of the greatest papers. The 25 papers were agreed
upon; emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and
international, of these papers; an agreement was reached; the policy
of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was
furnished to each paper to properly supervise and edit information
regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial
policies and other things of national and international nature
considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.
“This contract is in existence at the present time, and it accounts
for the news columns of the daily press of the country being filled
with all sorts of preparedness arguments and misrepresentations as
to the present condition of the United States army and navy and the
possibility and probability of the United States being attacked by
foreign foes.
“This policy also includes the suppression of everything in
opposition to the wishes of the interests served. The effectiveness
of this scheme has been conclusively demonstrated by the character of
stuff carried in the daily press throughout the country since March,
1915. They have resorted to anything necessary, to commercialize
public sentiment and sandbag the National Congress into making
extravagant and wasteful appropriations for the army and navy under
the false pretense that it was necessary. Their stock argument is
that it is ‘patriotism.’ They are playing on every prejudice and
passion of the American people.”
=Pathfinders.=--In reply to the question, “Who are the twelve
greatest Americans of German descent?” the following were named by a
small committee who conferred upon the matter:
Franz Daniel Pastorius, founder of Germantown and author of the first
protest against slavery on American soil.
Conrad Weiser, “the first who combined the activity of a pioneer with
the outlook of a statesman.”--Benson J. Lossing.
Governor Jacob Leisler, acting governor of New York, the first martyr
to the cause of American independence.
Heinrich Melchior Muhlenberg, founder of the Lutheran Church in
America and father of General Muhlenberg and of the first Speaker of
the House of Representatives.
John Peter Zenger, founder of the freedom of the press in America.
David Rittenhouse, America’s first great scientist.
General Frederick von Steuben, the drillmaster of the American
Revolutionary army, who received the surrender of Cornwallis at
Yorktown.
John Jacob Astor, the pioneer and pathfinder in American industrial
enterprise.
Carl Schurz, Union general, diplomat, United States Senator and
Cabinet officer; founder of the Civil Service.
Francis Lieber, politician, encyclopedist, college professor, who
first codified the laws of war for the United States government.
Ottmar Mergenthaler, inventor of the typesetting machine.
Charles P. Steinmetz, one of the world’s greatest electricians.
=Poison Gas.=--That the Germans were not the first to use poison
gas in warfare, that the practice originated with the English, and
that the French used gases in the world war before the Germans,
was well known to thousands in a position to inform others, but no
denial of this falsehood has ever been made. The first recorded use
of poison gas in modern times was in connection with the bombardment
of Colenso by the English during the Boer War. The fact is testified
to by General von der Golz in a book describing the English military
operations against the Boers, which he witnessed as German military
attache, and is verified in a number of accounts of the war against
the South African republics. The guns used against Colenso to
discharge the gas and kill the defenders by asphyxiation were brought
from the British dreadnought, “Terrible.” It was a typical English
invention. At first there was no thought of using gas in land
warfare. It was designed to be discharged by a shell which should
penetrate the armor-plate of an enemy vessel. A poisoned gas-shell
exploding inside of another vessel was expected to kill everybody
under deck. When it was found impossible to effect the surrender
of Colenso, the guns were used there for the first time in field
operations, as stated. These facts are further corroborated by Mr.
George A. Schreiner, Associated Press correspondent during the recent
war, author of “The Iron Ration,” and a participant in the defense of
Colenso, who to this day is feeling the effect of the gas.
The charge that the Germans were the first to use gas bombs and
the attempt to represent their employment of such bombs as acts of
barbarism was ridiculed by Gustav Hervé, the editor of the Paris “La
Guerre Sociale,” in these words: “There is a bit of hypocrisy in this
show of indignation against the use of asphyxiating gas. Have we
forgotten the incredible stories that were told about the effects of
turpinite when in August the Germans were marching toward Paris and
the craziest stories were in general circulation? People in fits of
ecstacy told others about the murderous effect of the asphyxiating
bombs of the celebrated inventor. ‘Why, my dear sir, 70,000 Germans
were simply stricken down; whole regiments were destroyed by
asphyxiation.’ I remember very distinctly. No one protested. As long
as we believed in the marvel of Turpin’s asphyxiating powder, Turpin
was hailed as a hero. Then why this absurd cry, this hypocritical
attempt to condemn the Germans for inventing a powder, that in
comparison with the turpinite we called to our aid in the hour of
our greatest distress, appears to be as gentle as the holy St. John.
Instead of blaming the Germans for utilizing asphyxiating gases, we
might better blame ourselves for permitting the enemy to outdo us in
inventive genius.”
General Amos A. Fries, head of the Chemical Service of the American
Expeditionary Forces, quoted in the February, 1919, issue of
“Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering,” described the use of poison
gas as “the most humane method of fighting.” Only 30 per cent. of
American casualties and 5 per cent. of the deaths were due to gas.
He held that the situation was similar to that when gunpowder was
first utilized, a practice “universally frowned upon as unfair and
unsportsmanlike, yet it endured.” In a similar vein General Sibert
testified before a Senate Committee in June, 1919.
=Penn, William.=--Founder of Pennsylvania, under whose jurisdiction
the first Pennsylvania German settlements were effected. His mother
was a Dutch woman, Margaret Jasper, of Rotterdam. Dutch was Penn’s
native tongue, as well as English. He was a scholar versed in Dutch
law, history and religion. He preached in Dutch and won thousands of
converts and settlers, inviting them to his Christian Commonwealth.
(Dr. William Elliot Griffis.) Oswald Seidensticker (“Bilder aus der
Deutsch-Pennsylvanischen Geschichte,” Steiger, New York, p. 82)
writes:
“For more than a century Germantown remained true to its
name, a German town. William Penn in 1683 preached there,
in Tunes Kunder’s house in the German language, and General
Washington in 1793 attended German service in the Reformed
Church.”
=Pilgrim Society.=--A powerful organization in New York City,
nominally for the promotion of the sentiment of brotherhood among
Englishmen and Americans, but in reality to promote a secret movement
to unite the United States with “the Mother Country,” England,
as advocated by Andrew Carnegie, the late Whitelaw Reid, and, as
provided for in the secret will of Cecil Rhodes. Among its prominent
members are the British Ambassador, J. Pierpont Morgan, Thomas W.
Lamont, partner of Morgan; John Revelstoke Rathom, British-born
editor of the Providence “Journal;” Adolph Ochs, owner of the New
York “Times;” Ogden Mills Reid, President New York “Tribune,” and
brother-in-law of the first Equerry to the King of England; James
M. Beck and numerous other Wall Street corporation lawyers, and the
underwriters of the Anglo-French war loan of $500,000,000 and Russian
ruble loan.
=Quitman, Johan Anton.=--One of the most prominent and daring
soldiers of the Mexican War; son of Friedrich Anton Quitman, a
Lutheran minister at Rhinebeck-on-Hudson. Born 1798, took part in
the war for the independence of Texas from Mexico, and in 1846 was
made brigadier general. Fought with the greatest distinction at
Monterey; first at the head of his command to reach the marketplace
of the hotly-contested city and raised the American flag on the
church steeple. Was in command of the land batteries in 1847, and
in conjunction with the American fleet bombarded Vera Cruz into
surrender. Distinguished himself at Cerro Gordo, was brevetted
Major General and voted a sword by Congress. On September 13, at
the head of his troops, stormed Chapultepec, the old fortress of
Montezuma, which was considered impregnable by the Mexicans, and on
the following day opened the attack on Mexico City, which he entered
September 15. Gen. Scott, as a mark of appreciation, appointed
Quitman governor of the city, in which capacity he served until
peace was restored. He was later elected governor of Mississippi and
elected to Congress by large majorities from 1855 to 1858, the year
of his death. General Quitman had an eventful career, beginning as a
teacher of German at Mount Airy College, Pennsylvania. He studied law
and began to practice at Chillicothe, Ohio. Proceeding to Natchez,
Miss., he became Chancellor of the Supreme Court, member of the
Senate, in the State Legislature, then its president, participating
in the Texas War for Independence, visited Germany and France, and on
his return was appointed to the Federal bench. His father was born
in Cleve, Rhenish Prussia, and was a brilliant scholar, high in the
councils of the Lutheran church.
=Representation in Congress, 1779-1912.=--Table compiled of the
membership of Congress from 1779 to and including the 62nd Congress:
Total number of members of Senate and House
from the 1st to the 62nd Congress 7,500
Total number of members of Senate and House of
foreign birth, 1st to 62nd Congress 302
Distributed as follows:
Ireland 114
England 47
Germany 42
Scotland 37
Canada 23
France 8
Austria 5
West Indies 4
Norway 4
Sweden 3
Wales 4
Holland 2
Switzerland 2
Bermuda Islands 2
Denmark 1
Brazil 1
Azore Islands 1
Madeira Islands 1
Spanish Florida 1
------
302