Capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1893-1895, 1894-07-27
KINDERGARTEN VS. sKlLlINO-NArnINES


for extra speed of war vessel would
build, equip and conduct 2O7 kindergar'
ten schools for two years. The opinion
was expressed that to start ten thou
sand poor little children right in life
was of more importance than armies
and navies. The contrast was violent
one and started not a few minds to
considering the underlying principles.
The Sunday Oregonian devotes
column of editorial to refuting the posi-
tion taken, and argues with much
ability on the value of a navy, and the
necessity of being ready for war as an
assurance of peace. He quotes Bacon,
Solon and the New York Times as
authorities for maintaining q costly
naval force. He cites Salamis, Lopanto,
Trafalgar and Actium, to show the
danger of extinction from a naval
power superior to our own.
Without wishing to engage the Ore
gonian in controversy it occurs to any
thinker that the authorities cited, and
the naval battles referred to, are not
quite "apropos." We have passed the
days of Bacon and Solon, though they
both taught that the force of moral
ideas was the most potent civiliz'ng
power. The fact that Cleopatra and
Pompey lost their armies and govern
ments at Actium has nothing to do
with situation such as exists in the
United States to-day. Bacon of 800
years ago and Scion of 5000 years ago
are not to the point in this controversy.
Our country needs moral develop
meLt. 1t needs employment for its
millions of unemployed poor people,
more than the boast Of naval power or
1hO pump VI W0AhnO POPoioe'ono
against imaginary foes. We need
betterment of our moral forces more
than patchwork of few millions
here or there on warship. The hands,
the eyes, the hearts, the brains of a
million future citizens requires more
rational development into better man.
hood and womanhood and better type
of citizenship, or all the navies and
armies we can construct shall not save
our nation from dissolution. Germany
and England told us in our recent strike
trouble that we were ON the verge of
destruction and 1t was true. So long
as men can become multi-millionalres
In generation, while the wages of
their employees are constantly ground
lower and lower, and no material re-
duction In the price of the service such
monopolies render, and laborers resort
to brute force and destruction of life
and property our need is not of navies
on the seas, but more wisdom at home.
Our country has no foes abroad equal
TO those at home. Warships will not
reach the anarchist or assassin In our
large cities. When harvest hands
work for rs cts. day and the farmer
Ia doing his work and boarding him
self at a loss to put wheat on the mar
ket at 40 cts. which costs him 90 cts. q
bushel, when money is constantly
growing scarcer, when more and more
are unemployed, is not time when
our natiOn can to advantage build more
warships. The argument for navies
and war has always been advanced for
the protection of wealth, not for the
uplifting of the masses. Charles Sum-
mer, of Massach usetts, and John Bright,
OF England, surely tower ABOVE the |
heads OF ordinary writers and thinkers
and they were opposed to armies and |
navies in time Of peace. If we had a
hundred ironclads, chances are we
should not have chance to shoot any
one for twenty years. Yet they would
lost three to four hundred millions.
Then we would not have ships enough
o guard our coasts and harbos
tretched along eleven thousand miles.
While navy may be OF importance to
ar commerce, there are matters more
nportant and vital to our national
rowth and security.
a ~ n - A - II