Congress should not delay in enacting it and appropriating funds sufficient for its effective execution. The exceptional character of the Bolshevist menace makes it a matter of national concern. The federal government should primarily attempt to protect us against its insidious effects. We should not be dependent upon state action, and yet where, as in New York State, there already exists an adequate statute, the power of our state government ought to be brought to bear to abate the evil. The New York Anarchy Statute, passed on account of the assassination of President McKinley, is probably sufficient. We hear much of investigations and are startled by disclosures. But there seem to be few prosecutions and few convictions. DEPORTATION Prosecution under criminal laws is not the only remedy open to the federal government. The deportation of objectionable aliens is a remedy much more expeditious in most cases and equally effective. The immigration laws as amended in 1918 probably do not need to be amended to enable the Department of Labor to deport objectionable aliens. During the war such aliens were deported under the Espionage Act, but that act will probably not be available in time of peace. While under the immigration law the accused is entitled to hearings and to be admitted to bail and may on a writ of habeas corpus get his case into the courts, it still remains the fact that vigorous prosecution by the Department of Labor can do much to improve the situation. The administration by that department does not, however, appear to have accomplished substantial results and there is grave ground for the opinion that in this city the efforts of the Commissioner of Immigration were not at critical times marked by much vigor. While deportation ought to be an effective remedy, here again the Attorney General complains that Congress refused appropriations to his department and the Department of Labor for the enforcement of the law. The American people are thus made to suffer because of a lack of coördination between the executive and the legislative departments. Too much publicity cannot be given to this unfortunate situation. VI THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 1 THE AMERICAN VIEW THE belief undoubtedly pervades the mass of the people of the world that now is the time to find a way to prevent war in the future. The feeling is more or less inarticulate, but it is none the less widespread and insistent; and the statesmen in the Peace Council realize that a serious effort must be made to devise some practicable method to give it form and effect. The United States has been the foremost nation of the earth in promoting the settlement of international disputes by arbitration and the postponement of war during the process. It has seemed strange, therefore, that a definite project for the avoidance of war should have met at first with hesitation and criticism in this country. But this attitude has been much changed by open discussion and the burning out of the fires of partisanship; and the solicitude lest our implication in European affairs should result in an undue surrender of our independence has been largely removed. By long-established national habit, based on the warnings of Washington and Jefferson against entangling alliances, we have come to attach vital importance to the condition of political isolation which our geographical remoteness has enabled us to maintain. But the present discussion is making it increasingly clear that the wise policy of a century ago is not applicable to the conditions of to-day, first, because through cable communications and quick ocean transportation, 1 Reprinted from a series of articles published in the New York Times of March 24-25, and April 4, 1919. |