The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-12-06

1904. the United States governmsnt communicated to the representatives of foreign governments its belief that the conference could be best arranged under the provisions of the present Hague treaty.
 From all the powers acceptance was received, coupled in some cases with the condition that we should wait un- til the end of the war then wagiHg between Russia and Japan. The en- perOr of Russia, immediately after the treaty of peace which so happily ter minated this war. i'll a note presented to the president on September B, through Ambassador Rosen, took the initiative that the conference be now called. The United States government in response expressed it's cordial &C., quiescence and stated that it would, as a matter of course, take part in the new conference and endeaVor to fur ther it's aims, We assume that all civilized governments will support the movement, and that the conference is now an assured fact. This govern ment will do everything in its power to secure the success of the conference to the end that substantial progress may be made in the cause of interna' tional peace, justice and good will.
 This renders it proper at this time to say something as to the general atti- tude of this government toward peace. More and more war is coming to be looked upon as in itself a lam@ntab'e and evil thing. A wanton or useless war, or a war of mere aggression-in short. any war begun or carried on in a constituencies spirit, is to be con- Genned as a peculiarly atroc!ous crime against all humanity We can, how ever, do nothing of permanent value for peace unless we keep clearly in mind the ethical element which lies at the root of. the problem. Our aim is righteousness. Peace is normally the handmaiden of righteousness; but when peace and righteousness conflict then a great and upright people can never for a moment hesitate to follow the path which leads toward righteous ness, even though that path also leads to war. There are persons who adVo- cate peace at any price; there are oth- CTS who, following a false analogy think that because it is no longer nec- essary in civilized countries for indi- viduals to protect their rights with a strong hand, it is therefore unnecessary for nations to be ready to defend their rights. These persons would do ire para ble harm to any nation that adopt ed their principles, and even as it is they seriously hamper the cause which they advocate by tending to render Ii absurd in the eyes of sensible and pat riotic men. There can be TO worse foe of mankind in general, and of his own country in particular, than the dema- g0gue of war, the man who in mere fol0y or to serve his own selfish ends continually rails al and abuses other nations, who seeks to excite his cCun- trymen against foreigners on insufTi- cient pretexts, who exeites and infiames a perverse and aggressive national vall- ity, and who may 0n occasions wantOn- ly bring on conflict between his nation and some other nation But there are demagoguea of peace just as there are demag5gues of war, and in any such movement as this for The Hague con- ference it is essential not to be misted by one set of extremists any more than by the other. Whet1ekhr it is possible for q nation or an individual to work in real peace, assuredlg it is failure of duty not so to strive; but if war is necessary and righteous then either the
 man or the nation shrinking for 1t for feits all title to self-respect. We have scant sympathy with the sentimental ist who dreads oppression. less than physical suffering, who would prefer 8 shameful peace to the pain and toll sometimes lamentably necessary in or der to secur ca righteous peace. As yet there is only a partial and imper- feet analogy between international law and internal or municipal law, because there is no sanction of force for execut- ing the former while there is in the case of the latter. The private citizen Is protected in his rights b ythe law because the law rests in the last resort upon force exercised through the forms of law. A man does not have to de- fend his rights with his own hand, be- cause he can call upon the police, up the sheriff's posse. upon the militia, or in certain extreme cases upon the army, to defend him. But there is no such sanction of force for international law. At present there could be no greater calamity than for the free peo- pies, the enlightened, Independent and peace-loving people, to disarm while yet leaving it open to any barbarism or despotism to remain armed. So long as the world is as unUrganized as now, the armies and navies of these peoples who on the whole stand for jus tice, offer not only the best, but the only possible, security fbr a just peace For instance, if the United States alone, or in company only with the other na- tions that on the whde tend to act justly, disarmed, we might sometimes to be of weight in securing the peace of justice-the real peace for which the most law-abiding and high-minded men must at times be willing to fight. As the world is now, only that nation is equipped for peace that knows how to fight and that will not shrink from fighting if ever the conditions become such that war is demanded in the name of the highest morality.
 So much it is emphatically necessary to say in order both that the position of the United States may not be mis- understood, and that genuine effort to bring nearer the day of the peace of