A Self-Confessed Hyphenate

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

An insult directed at the flag of a great nation is indicative of serious and dangerous feelings. Judging from what the CRIMSON mind had to say in a recent editorial entitled "Greater Ireland," it appears that aspersions cast upon the Union Jack in America are regarded as more important and less friendly than the trampling on the Stars and Stripes by students of McGill University in Canada two weeks ago, and the similar defiling of this country's emblem by sailors of the British Navy over a year ago in Bermuda. Perhaps gross ignorance of what is going on in the world is responsible for the CRIMSON's attitude. If not, what can be its significance, unless it is merely another manifestation of convenient forgetfulness?

The thought and reasonableness of that editorial "Greater Ireland," is a case in hand for the Freudians. All of it is predicated on the wish. Speaking of Mr. Eamon de Valera, the admirable specimen, asserts that "The President has encouraged and even secretly inaugurated, societies that are avowedly and actively hostile to the British Government," and that "it is time that those activities should be stopped. And why? And how? Ought de Valera be stopped for the same reasons for which Franklin might have been ejected from France when he went seeking financial aid and recognition for the United States of America? The arguments which yesterday were employed in defense of Liberty and Freedom are today pressed into the service of those who would crush them both.

Of course I am expecting the objection that Franklin's activity in France and de Valera's in America are not similar, and that the sacrifices in bodies and blood by Irishmen before the altar of Liberty are not like the successful bloodshed of your human ancestors, the American Revolutionists. I admit the objection. Eamon de Valera is not Benjamin Franklin, and Sinn Feiners are not American Revolutionists. The implication is plain; it tends to explain the CRIMSON's attitude.

Speaking of the Committee of One Hundred formed in order to investigate conditions in Ireland, the writers of "Greater Ireland" further assert that "many reputable Americans who were invited to serve on the Committee declined to do so, thus leaving a personnel composed almost entirely of avowed Irish sympathizers."

Does the CRIMSON mean the inference that those serving on the Committee now are not reputable? Is it to be understood that Jane Addams, Joseph Wingate Folk, Frederick Clemson Howe, James H. Maurer and David I. Walsh are of a category to be shunned and contemned by Harvard gentlemen? Probably not! However, I feel that the CRIMSON did not know what it thought, if I can go so far as to assume that it was thinking at all. Reputable Americans! To be reputable, must one refuse to feel for suffering men?

The CRIMSON, reputable withal, was for the League, in favor of "going in," to save the World. It appeared to be thinking of suffering mankind then. That was reputable. Can it be that it was merely in a mystic mood and so impelled to pay lip-service to a rare experience? The CRIMSON reflects the tendency of Repute to become identical with Callousness. As one of those branded by the CRIMSON as Hyphenate, I wonder how it feels to brand and all the while bow in awe before an Imperial Idol? J. L. DONOVAN '22. December 15, 1920.