Approved In Congress.

New York Times 100 years ago today, August 28, 1913:
Both Parties Praise President Wilson's Message.
Special to The New York Times.
    WASHINGTON, Aug. 27. — Unmistakable evidence was driven to-day to Mexico and the rest of the world that President Wilson had a united Congress behind him in his dealings with the situation south of the Rio Grande. Senators and Representatives of both parties joined in praise of the President’s message and pledged him their hearty support.

Generally Approved by Senators.
    A chorus of statements approving the President’s speech was heard from the Senators as soon as they returned to their end of the Capitol. These expressions came from leaders both of the Republican and Democratic sides. Many of them were strikingly emphatic, but here and there was evidence of a definite intention to answer beyond dispute Provisional President Huerta’s taunt that Congress was not supporting President Wilson. But along with these approving declarations, sometimes even from Senators issuing statements favorable to the President, was veiled criticism of the wisdom of the course outlined in the speech.
    Criticism was directed at both of the affirmative proposals of the President, the embargo against arms destined for any of the contending factions and the urgent recommendation that Americans leave Mexico. The Senate has long been overwhelmingly of the opinion that the easiest solution of Mexico’s tangled problem would be to let both sides arm themselves freely, so that an end might come to their fighting through the stern elimination of war. Senators are still of that opinion, but all efforts to repeal the neutrality law, under which the President may prohibit the shipment of arms, will be suspended until the course determined by him has had a fair trial. Meanwhile Senator Penrose of Pennsylvania will be absent for a week, so that his resolution calling for police protection of Americans in Mexico will cause no discussion.
    One Senator whose loyalty to the President is beyond question, suggested informally that, even to make the embargo on arms effective, regardless of the wisdom of such a course, it would be necessary for the United States to induce all the powers of the world to prevent shipments from their ports. There is reason to believe that efforts in this direction may be made, following the expressions of sympathy and willingness to co-operate with which European nations have already met President Wilson’s proposals. At the same time the Senator suggested that lack of money with which to buy arms might make the embargo real.

Dangers of American Exodus.
    Criticism of the President’s proposal to induce American colonists to leave Mexico was more open. Senator Fall of New Mexico, while indorsing the President’s desire for peace, said that he felt that the duty of the United States was to protect her citizens and not require them to leave all their property at the mercy of contending factions.
    Other Senators pointed out that the proposal that Americans leave Mexico took no care of Europeans similarly situated. It was suggested that this might prove a serious weakness in the President’s plan, and alienate the support hitherto received from foreign powers.
    Senator Bacon of Georgia, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, said:
    "The President's message is an admirable document. It sets forth the facts without reservation and puts us right before the world. Moreover, I believe it will have a calming effect upon our own people and a soothing influence upon public expression in the United States. An important feature of the message which must be borne in mind is that it does not close the case; does not bring negotiations to a finality, but leaves the situation open for further dealings in an effort to bring about a satisfactory settlement."
    Senator Root of New York, former Secretary of State and a prominent member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said:
    "The message is admirable in tone and spirit, but as I may discuss it on the floor of the Senate, I will not go further now."

People’s Voice, Says O'Gorman.
    Senator O'Gorman of New York, a Democratic member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, issued this statement:
    It is a splendid message. It reflects the sober thought of the nation. It is not singular that in this crisis the President has the united support of the Congress of the United States. The Republican members of the Senate vie with their Democratic colleagues in sustaining the action of the Executive. In international relations partisanship stops at the border. The impressive utterance of the President to-day is the voice of the American people."
    Senator Stone of Missouri, a member of the committee who has Heretofore strongly favored war, said: The message is well written and was well delivered. Its effect on the people of the country will be a happy one."
    Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts, ranking Republican of the Committee on Foreign Relations said:
    "It is an excellent message. Its substantive declaration is that forbidding the shipment of arms to Mexico. I am in hearty accord with that. The United States could not put itself in the position of adding to the slaughter in Mexico. Only two courses were open to the president — intervention or non-intervention — and I am sure that, the sentiment of the country would not tolerate intervention. The President’s policy is that of waiting upon events, and I feel that he could now pursue no other. Mr. Wilson announced that the mission of Mr. Lind had failed, as was generally expected. With respect to the suggestion of the President that Americans should leave Mexico, the same was made by Taft. It is one which only the President could make. In many of these matters the President must be the judge. I believe other powers are no less desirous than the United States that the shipment of arms shall be stopped, and I should expect them to intimate the same to their subjects."
    Senator Fall, Republican, of New Mexico, had this to say:
    "I am heartily in accord with the President in his efforts to maintain peace with Mexico. The only criticism of the message I have to make is with reference to that part which urges Americans to leave Mexico. I have always been of that school which believes that in treating with a civilized country the United States should insist always upon the protection of her citizens within the borders of that country. The President seems to indicate that Mexico cannot be considered a civilized nation when he suggests that Americans leave Mexico."

Texas Senator Is Satisfied.
    Senator Sheppard, Democrat, of Texas: "I stand with the President. His message is practically a recognition of the belligerency of the insurrectionaries as contemplated in the resolution I introduced."   
    Senator John Sharp Williams of Mississippi, a Democratic member of the Committee on Foreign Relations:
    "I am delighted with it. I would not change it in any way if I were doing it myself."
    Senator Kern of Indiana, majority leader of the Senate:    
    "If there has been any agitation in favor of intervention, this message will check it. The sentiment in favor of lifting the embargo has been greatly exaggerated."
    Senator Shively of Indiana, a Democratic member of the Committee on Foreign Relations:    
    "The message is temperate and well worded. It puts us right before the Governments of the world. No matter what follows, this shows that we have exhausted all peaceful methods. The best feature of the message is that it announced to the Central and South American republics that this country has no desire for territorial aggrandizement."
    Senator Smith of Arizona, a Democratic member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, commended the President's peaceful efforts and predicted that Congress would mark time and await developments.    
    Senator Jones, Republican, of Washington, said:    
    "I am with the President in any effort to preserve the peace. I may not agree with him in all his methods, but, right or wrong, he will have my support."
    The commendation of the President's attitude was even stronger among members of the House.

Praise from Clark and Underwood.
    Champ Clark, Democrat, Speaker of the House:
    "It seems to me that this Mexican situation presents a case where silence on the part of most folk is golden. It is ticklish and grave. The President's address to Congress on the subject is admirable — lofty in conception, felicitous in diction. In the very nature of things he knows more about a situation which changes every day — almost every hour — than the rest of us, and speaks with fuller knowledge. The most practical suggestion that was made was that Americans should come out of Mexico as rapidly and as soon as possible." Representative Oscar W. Underwood, Democratic floor leader:
    "I approve the President's message thoroughly. I think it was the message of a statesman. I am glad to see that the President is making every effort to maintain peaceful relations between the two countries."
    Representative James R. Mann of Illinois, Republican, leader of the minority in the House:
    "I have no comment that I wish to make."
    Representative Henry D. Flood of Virginia, Democrat, Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs:
    "It was a splendid message. It has met with universal approval. Every comment I have heard on it is favorable."
    Representative A. Mitchell Palmer of Pennsylvania, Chairman of the Democratic caucus:
    "The President’s message should and undoubtedly will have the effect of bringing Mexico soon to an acceptance of this Government's proposals. The manner of its reception by the Congress and the approval which will be shown by the country will be ample evidence to Mexico that all America is behind President Wilson in his desire to be of friendly aid to the people of the republic and to work out the protection of Americans and American interests without forcible intervention in a quarrel that is purely internal. The message is an early assurance of a peaceful solution of the whole difficulty."

Kahn’s Critical Attitude.
    Representative Julius Kahn of California, Republican, ranking minority member of the House Military Committee:
    "As a literary effort the President’s message was perfection itself. What effect it will have in Mexico remains to be seen. Of course, it is easy to take out of Mexico the Americans who are at present in that republic. Their property, however, will have to be abandoned, and we shall have to look to Mexico at some time for the indemnification of American citizens whose property is destroyed. Even at the present time there are millions of dollars worth of claims pending which have been in process of adjudication for many years. To secure one’s claim against the Republic of Mexico requires extreme patience and occasions many heartaches. But, how about the citizens of England, France, Germany, Italy and the other European powers? These powers rather look to us to care for their citizens in Mexico, for they feel that under the Monroe Doctrine they are stopped from protecting themselves. If the turmoil that prevails in our sister republic continues, how long will the patience of the European Governments last? Will they not demand that we must do something to safeguard the lives and property of their citizens? It seems to me that these are some of the questions that must be considered, and that the President overlooked in the message."
    Representative Henry A. Cooper of Wisconsin, Republican, ranking minority member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee:
    "I hope that the President's prophecies as to an early peace will be realized, but that it will not be a peace with the success of the Huerta Government. It certainly ought not to be."
    Representative Swagar Sherley of Kentucky, Democratic member of the House Appropriations Committee:
    "The President’s message was most admirable in substance and style. The whole country, I think, will approve it." Representative William C. Adamson of Georgia, Democratic Chairman of the House Interstate Commerce Committee:
    "It was a very fine message. If we had had a message like that in 1898, when the Cuban question was acute we should never have had any war with Spain and should have had a good deal better relations with Cuba. The President's advice to Americans in Mexico to come home and remain here until the danger is passed and peace restored was very wise and wholesome. Neutrality, absolute and complete, will soon demonstrate what ought to be done in Mexico."
    Representative Martin A. Morrison of Indiana, Democrat:
    "I am thoroughly pleased with the message. So far as I have talked with any one, they are all thoroughly satisfied with the President’s policy. I think he has rendered this country and Mexico a very great service." Representative Ben Johnson of Kentucky, Democratic Chairman of the House District Committee:
    "I think the message is just exactly right. It is one of the greatest State papers ever written. I am in accord with every statement in it, and was very apprehensive that it was going to be something different."
    Representative Thomas A. Gallagher of Illinois, Democrat:
    "I think the President has taken a very firm stand, and that when the Mexican people realize the attitude of the Government here they will believe it to be to the best interest of the Mexican people to accept the advice of President Wilson. If Congress will follow it up with a resolution of approval it may awaken the Mexicans to the actual conditions here."
    Representative William N. Baltz of Illinois, Democrat:
    "I am only a new member and a farmer, untrained in diplomacy, but I think it was the greatest message ever delivered to the Congress. I believe President Wilson is taking the right stand in this Mexican situation."

"Only Temporary in Effect."
    Representative William P. Borland of Missouri, Democrat:
    "I thought the President's message very fine, and believe it should have a soothing and quieting effect on the American people. Of course, it is only temporary in effect. It does not solve the imbroglio. Unless the Huerta Government accepts very promptly the offer of mediation, it will be necessary for us to take charge in order to secure public order and the protection of Americans and foreigners in Mexico. That, in my judgment, will be the next step to be taken. I heartily concur with the President in giving public opinion a chance to operate on the situation." Representative Halvor Steenerson of Minnesota, Republican:
    "It was a very good message, and I think that it meets the popular sentiments in the matter. We can afford to be patient with Mexico, although no doubt there is a limit beyond which the American people will not endure and will not go. Just now I think the sentient almost everywhere is that we want to avoid intervention if we possibly can, and the President is doing all he can to carry out that sentiment."
    Representative Frank E. Doremus of Michigan, Democrat:
    "It was the sort of a message one would expect from President Wilson. I believe it voices the sentiment of practically the entire American people. It will commend itself to the sober judgement of the civilized world as a lofty, moral, and patriotic expression of this nation's attitude toward Mexico. The President has certainly exhibited rare caution and splendid patience in dealing with a trying situation. All Americans will earnestly hope that the Mexican authorities will soon see the wisdom of the course marked out by the President."
    Representative Charles Bartlett of Georgia, Democrat:
    "I think the message is the message of one of the greatest Presidents we have ever had; that it shows, above all things else, that the President has the interest of the people of the United States at heart and has pursued the only sensible and statesmanlike course that he could in order to maintain peace and the dignity and honor of the United States. My people down in Georgia will heartily approve the President’s policy."