New-York tribune., 1909-03-16
OF IRENIC ALLIANCES.

! In earnest championship of his latest scheme
| for assuring universal peace Mr.. Andrew Car
| negie appears to overlook certain facts Of his
| tory and certain principles of international
| relationship and of national policy which. at
| least in the United States, to be regarded az
| fundamental and immutable. Thus the alliance
between Great Britain and Japan which be
commends for American imitation, has not OBJ
! waited steady and enormous naval expansion by
| both of those powers Neither has the Triple
Alliance in Europe encouraged any of its men,
| bers TO diminish its armament but rather has
| compelled them all greatly 10 increase their
| forces. 1t is easy TO talk of one allys being
called upon to protect only certain possessions"
| of the other but the fact is that when two ma
| tions are ut war they are at war at all points
Thus. If we allied ourselves with Great Britain,
as Mr.. Carnegie desires, and our ally were at
tackled by some other power, we could scarcely
say To that power that we were ar war with
it on the Atlantic, but at peace with it on the
Pacific 1t would have TO be peace everywhere
or war everywhere. And that fact would surely,
in spite of Mr. CarnegieS disclaimer, compel
each Of these proposed allies tO maintain lis
present naval strength if not actually 10 in
crease It. For what relief would il he TO us
not TO have 10 protect cur Pacific coast and
islands If we had instead 10 protect all the
Atlantic possessions of Great Britain, or even
merely neF Norm Aitdutic IoSStsSloHS, rllCe
Mr.. Carnegie now thus modifies his original
proposal?
Mr.. Carnegie seems 10 suggest n criticism OF
Mr. Roosevelt for saying three years ago that
~ur navy was then sufficient and that all that
remained TO keep II SO by building one new
battieship year and yet this year asking for
four new ships. But Mr.. Roosevelt was per
fectly consistent Three years ago our navy
was sufficient, because II was stronger than any
other save only Great BTltain's, and all that
was necessary desirable was to keep II so.
and at the rate at which other navies were
then growing the addition Of one hattleship
year seemed sufficient to maintain that supe-
riority. All that is now asked is that our navy
shall be kept securely in the second place. But
our chief rival for that place iS now pushing
forward so rapidly that the building of one bat
tleship year is no longer sufficient for US. Mr.,
Carnegie does not make known his reasons for
thinking that Germany will not have a great
navy "as soon as expected and in that opinion
he differs from naval experts, who reckon that
Germanys navy is now near 10 equalling our
own. and Is likely to surpass ii in two or three
years if we do not exert ourselves more than
we have lately seemed inclined to do.
But perhaps the most notable fallaCy Of Mr..
Carnege's ingenious plea for an renic alliance
Is IN the notion that any nation, and above all
this nation. would consent 10 intrust its own
security and integrity to alien guardianship.
We believe in the sincerity and Permanence Of
the friendship between Great Britain and Amer
lea and the unthinkableness Of Il war between
the two. But we do not believe that either Of
these nations will or would or should 50 greatly
RELY upon the others protection as to neglect
or abate ali preparations for self-defence. 1t
was the final and crOwning eXhortation of
Washington'S Farewell Address 10 avoid the
error. than which none could be greater, of
sacrificing independence by relying upon favors
from other powers: AN illusion which expert
"ence must cure. which Just pride ought 80
discard" Mr.. Carnegie may not esteem that
advice more highly than he apparently does
some other advice from the same source But
we think the time is too far distant to he within
practical consideration when either of the two
great branches Of the Anglo-Saxon race viii
disregard it account it other than wise,
prudent and patriotic.