The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1903-05-31
WAR AND IT'S CONSEQUENCES
II Series Of International Relations

and points out the obvious and great
inequality between the different branches
OF the British empire.
| The chapter on Conditions Deter
mining the Naval Expansion of the
United States" is a spirited defense of
territorial expansion, containing good,
sound economic reasons for 1t in place
of the misty sentimentaIism or militant
greediness which its enemies have al
| legged as its defense. If there is anybody
who still thinks the Philippines do not
belong to us he will do we'll to read
this essay and ponder 1t deeply. One
paragraph of 1t IS especially significant,
as laying down principles which may
safely govern future acquisition of ter
| ritory, and as a sound defense of such
acquisition where 1t is warranted y
military expediency. Captain Mahan
says:
1T was very soundly argued by the
American opponents of the expansion
which has been realized in the last dec
| ade of the nineteenth century that
transmarine acquisitions would be SO
many new exposed points to be sup
ported by sea only, not by land. as the
continental territory can. They were
very right, and this is very true; the
flaw in their argument, as we'll as the
beam in the eye of the America public
which prevented IL from seeing clearly.
was the failure to note that. even when
not possessing a square foot of territory
without its borders. there were many
manifold interests abroad assailable by
a superior navy and only to be protected
by such display of force as should make
1t not worth while to arouse the nation
TO action.
Fallacy of the Argument.
1.-The argument of the opponents of
crate limits, and with due regard to To-
cality and consequent utility in the
positions acquired, was thus plausible
and was deplorably successful, but II
was fallacious. 1t adduced a sound
military reason-the increasing expos
ure-but wholly ignored qualifying con-
siderations of the most serious charac
ter, reversive of conclusions 1t may
with much more certainty now be alleg-
ed. and the assertion can be supported
to the point OF demonstration, that the
acquisitions of recent years. despite the
additional requirements of their defense
imposed upon the United States, have
not necessitated any increase of naval
force beyond that which would have
been imperattvely demanded at the pres
ent time had they never passed into
American hands. More still. they have
lessened the burden of purely naval in
crease, which but for them would have
been necessary; for by the tenure of
them, and due development of their re-
sources, the navy itself receives an ac-
cession of strength, an augmented ia
cility of movement, by resting upon
strong positions for equipment and re-
pair-upon bases, to use the military
term-in several parts of the world
where national interests demand naval
protection of the kind already mention
ed-namely, readiness to take the often
sive instantly"
Preiudiced Views.
The trouble with the anti-imperiaIist
is not that he is insincere, but that he
Is not we'll informed In view of the
food of one sided literature with which
the land has been deluged since the war
with Spain, plain statements like this
of Captain Mahan are worth repeating.
In his chapter on Admiral Sampson
Captain Mahan exhibits his power of
treating vexed question SO adroitly
as apparently not to perceive that 1t is
| vexed. There is nothing about Schley
in this essay, and the author has man
aged to eulogize Sampson without be-
ing controversial about II OF abusing
anybody else. Boston: Little, Brown
| & Coz