（五月十五日）
自美墨交衅以来，本城之“Ithaca Journal”揭一名言：“吾国乎，吾愿其永永正直而是也，然曲耶，直耶，是耶，非耶，终为吾国耳。”（My country—may it ever be right，but right or wrong，my country）意言但论国界，不论是非也。此言揭诸报端已逾旬日，亦无人置辩。一日，同居世界学生会之各国学生谈论偶及之，有表同情者，亦有反对者，莫衷一是。余适过之，聆其言论，有所感触，故以所见作一书寄此报主笔。其人不敢登载，社中访事某女士坚请登之，乃载入新闻栏（其书见下）。昨日余往见前校长白博士之夫人，夫人盛称余书，以为正彼所欲言而未能言者。白博士（Andrew Dickson White）曾两任使德大使，戊戌年海牙平和会，博士为美国代表团长，其功最多。夫妇都主张和平，故深恶此等极端之国家主义也。
MY COUNTRY——RIGHT OR WRONG,—MY COUNTRY
Students Representing Many Nationalities Debate as to the
Absurdity or Sense of the Slogan-Suh Hu's Impression.
An interesting debate took place at the Cosmopolitan Clubhouse on the Hill. The subject was the motto which has been printed at the top of the editorial page of The Ithaca Journal since the Mexican question began to become critical—"My country, may it ever be right, but right or wrong, my country." The last phrase, "right or wrong, my country" started the discussion.
An American student averred that it was an absolute absurdity, to stand by one's country whether it was right or wrong. All the other students present—including the representatives of all the different countries in the Club defended the saying vigorously. This number included students from all the different countries represented in the Cosmopolitan Club. "Some called it an absolute absurdity, while others defended it vigorously." No conclusion was reached.
Suh Hu'sidea
Suh Hu, the president of the Club, was struck by one thought that seemed to him to come nearest to the heart of the problem and presents it as follows:
"It appears to me that the fallacy of the saying 'Right or wrong, my country' lies in the fact that there is a double standard of morality. No one will deny that there is a standard of justice and righteousness—among the civilized people at least. Suppose 'my country' should tax me unconstitutionally, confiscate my property unjustly, or have me imprisoned without a trial, I would undoubtedly protest, even if it were done in the name of the law of 'my country'.
"But when we come to international affairs we immediately discard that standard of justice and righteousness, and we declare with no little pride, 'Right or wrong, my country.' Am I not right in saying that we are applying a double standard of morality—one to our fellow countrymen and another to foreign or 'outlandish' people？It seems to me that unless we adopt one standard of right -eousness both within and without our country, we have no common ground on which we can argue."
“吾国乎，是耶，非耶，终为吾国耳”
——胡适对各国学生代表辩论的印象
〔中译〕
世界学生会最近就此事争论甚为有趣，题目即为上引之格言。此格言自墨西哥问题激化以来一直印在《绮色佳杂志》社论篇之首，即：“吾国乎，吾愿其永永正直而是也，然曲耶，直耶，是耶，非耶，终为吾国耳。”其末一句引出了一场争论。
一美国学生认为不问该国行为之是非，总以其国利益为立场，此实大为荒谬。其余在场学生，包括世界学生会各国的代表，却为此言辩护，争论非常激烈。“有反对的，也有赞成的”，意见无法一致。
胡适之见
学生会会长胡适深以为此事之关键在于：
“我以为此谬见‘是耶，非耶，终为吾国耳’之所以为然，是因为有两个道德标准。人人都不反对万事皆有一个对错及正义与否的标准，至少文明国应如此。假如吾国违宪向吾征税，或非法将吾之产业充公，或未经审判即将吾入狱，吾誓必力争，不管其是否以‘吾国’法律之名义行此事。
“然而涉及国际间事，吾即放弃那个对错和正义与否之标准，且颇自得地宣称‘是耶，非耶，终吾国耳’。以此观之，余以为吾人奉行道德的双重标准，其一用之于国人，另一用之于他国，或‘化外之民’，余此说不亦对乎？余以为吾人不管国内国外只应奉行一个是非标准，否则无法争论此事。”