and usage, imagines that he can force her to agree to a code that the Germans now agree to because, in Germany’s present predicament, it will be especially advantageous to Germany.  Instead of trusting her, he assumes that she means to do wrong and proceeds to try to bind her in advance.  He hauls her up and tries her in court—­that’s his tone.

Now the relations that I have established with Sir Edward Grey have been built up on frankness, fairness and friendship.  I can’t have relations of any other sort nor can England and the United States have relations of any other sort.  This is the place we’ve got to now.  Lansing seems to assume that the way to an amicable agreement is through an angry controversy.

Lansing’s method is the trouble.  He treats Great Britain, to start with, as if she were a criminal and an opponent.  That’s the best way I know to cause trouble to American shipping and to bring back the good old days of mutual hatred and distrust for a generation or two.  If that isn’t playing into the hands of the Germans, what would be?  And where’s the “neutrality” of this kind of action?

See here:  If we let England go on, we can throw the whole responsibility on her and reserve all our rights under international law and usage and claim damages (and get ’em) for every act of injury, if acts of injury occur; and we can keep her friendship and good-will.  Every other neutral nation is doing that.  Or we can insist on regulating all naval warfare and have a quarrel and refer it to a Bryan-Peace-Treaty Commission and claim at most the selfsame damages with a less chance to get ’em.  We can get damages without a quarrel; or we can have a quarrel and probably get damages.  Now, why, in God’s name, should we provoke a quarrel?

The curse of the world is little men who for an imagined small temporary advantage throw away the long growth of good-will nurtured by wise and patient men and who cannot see the lasting and far greater future evil they do.  Of all the years since 1776 this great war-year is the worst to break the 100 years of our peace, or even to ruffle it.  I pray you, good friend, get us out of these incompetent lawyer-hands.

Now about the peace of Europe.  Nothing can yet be done, perhaps nothing now can ever be done by us.  The Foreign Office doubts our wisdom and prudence since Lansing came into action.  The whole atmosphere is changing.  One more such move and they will conclude that Dernburg and Bernstorff have seduced us—­without our knowing it, to be sure; but their confidence in our judgment will be gone.  God knows I have tried to keep this confidence intact and our good friendship secure.  But I have begun to get despondent over the outlook since the President telegraphed me that Lansing’s proposal would settle the matter.  I still believe he did not understand it—­he couldn’t have done so.  Else he could not have approved