There are a few professors of international law in Germany,
however, who have preserved a legally-balanced attitude despite
their sympathies. One of these wrote an article for a law
periodical, many of the statements of which were in direct
contradiction to statements in the German Press. The German
people, for example, were being instructed--a not difficult
task--that Britain was violating international law when her vessels
hoisted a neutral flag during pursuit. This professor simply
quoted paragraph 81 of the German Prize Code which showed that
orders to German ships were precisely the same. Were this known to
the German population one of the ten thousand hate tricks would be
out of commission. Therefore, this and similar articles must be
suppressed, not because they are not true, but because they would
interfere with the delusion of hate which saturates the mind of the
new Germany. I have seen articles returned to this distinguished
writer with the censor stamp: _Not to be published till after the
war_.

When a winning Germany began to grow angry at American munition
deliveries I heard much talk of the indemnity which the United
States would be compelled to pay after Europe had been duly
disposed of. Professor Hermann Oncken, of the University of
Heidelberg, made this his theme in a widely read booklet, entitled,
"_Deutschlands Weltkrieg und die Deutsch-Amerikaner_."

Professor P. von Gast, of the Technical College of Aachen, does
not appear to realise that his country has a sufficient job on her
hands in Europe and Africa, but thinks the midst of a great war a
suitable time to arouse his countrymen against the United States in
Latin America. He explains that the Monroe Doctrine was simply an