Louis Paul Lochner to William Isaac Hull, March 6, 1918

THE PEOPLE'S COUNCIL OF AMERICA
FOR DEMOCRACY AND PEACE

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS

138 WEST 13TH STREET
NEW YORK CITY

March 6th, 1918.

Professor William I. Hull,
[Swarthmore], Pa.

My dear Professor Hull: --

Mrs. Andrews, after the recent meeting of the Central Organization requested me to see her at her hotel and there appealed to me to resign from the Central Organization on the grounds that I was hindering the work because of the fact that in the public mind my presence was linking up the People's Council and the Central Organization. She also stated that you had expressed the opinion that I ought to resign.

I wonder whether you know all the facts in the case. First of all, I enclose a copy of the correspondence that has passed between Dr. Lynch and myself. Secondly, let me briefly recapitulate what I said to Mrs. Andrews in the course of the talk the other day. I stated that I believed it was up to the Central Organization to expel me and thereby take full responsibility for its action. It is putting me in a very peculiar position to ask me to resign for this reason: I am not so much concerned about the national work of the Central Organization as about the International. I want the International Organization to be in a position at the coming peace congress to wield real influence. It can do that only in proportion, I believe, as it represents a great body of movements. It cannot expect to wield great influence if its American groups is confessedly so narrow as to exclude certain persons who are whole-heartedly in their endorsement of the minimum program as a minimum which must be attained, but who happen to differ with some of the members in the group as to the conduct of the war and the participation of their government in it. By requesting me to resign, Mrs. Andrews practically asks me to be [page 2] a party to a narrowness with which I have no sympathy.

I understand from her that she fears that the American Branch may not be able to do effective work so long as one prominently identified with the People's Council is in the work. To this I would answer that in my estimation the Central Organization might as well go out of business as to show itself so [chauvinistic].

I assured Mrs. Andrews, however, that I did not want to be dogmatic in this matter, and that I wanted to think it over again. Frankly, her argument did not persuade me, though her appeal was very moving indeed and her sincerity not questioned.

I should be interested to hear your point of view.

Very sincerely yours,