The sun., 1915-11-15
MR.. ANGELES OPINION.
He Explains u MlscOnceptlon OF His
Ideal.

To THE EpiroR OF THE SrT--Sh, In
n report which appears In THE SrH ~
November - you wrote me, IN the heah-
line, az saying that the policy OF arm
ing is a mistake.
MAY 7 say that not merely did nor
saw this In the address with which tho
repor, deals. but explicitly warned NY
audience that | had not a word 20 sav
against the policy OF arming" l was
very careful 10 declare that, for all !
knew II might be necessary greatly to
increase tho armed forces Of the United
states But | added that that was not
enough ] said then. as | have often
said, that an not opposed to prepared
ness. but to preparedness by half meas
ure. incomplete preparedness.
Tho preparedness which we are neg
lecting IL the preparedness OF policy
In our days nations interests and
rights can never hs protected by arms
alone. No one OF the nations now fight
ing In Europe could have been secure n
IL had had 10 depend solely upon It's
own armed force without reference 10
some international policy or alliance
Which nation could have defended 1T
| self alone? Belgium? France? Is
! thers Il single one
Where do we stand IN the world COM
| b.natIons? Who Is going 10 be on our
sids in demanding u more civilized sea
| law Who against us? And II we
can't answer these questions how can
we pretend To defend our citizens or
! their trade al sen:
II this country. while enlarg!ng Its In
Nuence In. say. South America. piles uT
great armamerts and manages to create
| tho idea among the more expansive Eu-
| ropean nations that IL means to use Us
military power to exact preferential
commercial advantages for itself and In
some !reasure exclude Europeans COM
| mercially, II may we'll find itself em-
broiled in South America in costly and
enervating wars against great European
nations, wars which will serve no real
purpose to us and which some definite
ness OF policy might have avoided.
Ny whole point was that arms In the
last resort are for the defence not prop
erly speaking Of a country but policy
a simple truth which American history
particularly illustrates, II Its arnIa'
| ments ara to be effective. the people OF
this country. the world at large and thu
prospective eneyry must know what pol
ley the armarnents stand behind. Fail
ing that. this country will fight hrst ant
find out what 1t was fghting for after
ward. And that Is not tho way TO defent
national interests,
What every country needs as we'll a.
armamen,s Is a formulation OF polio,
which the world cannot mistake. Wha
do the armaments of this country stnn'
for with reference TO South America Sc;
law, Japan and the open door in Ash
and the support of some internatlona
code Cor tho prevention OF crude aggres
sion by any nation?
These are not simple questions. The,
: will need u great deal OF discussion OF
tho part OF tho American people aud arr
not getting it. But a decision concern
ing them is as necessary for security "a
battleships, and without such a decision
America will get into tho same kind q
muddle that Europe manages to, how
ever many battleshps sho may have
That Is not an argument against battle
ships; II n an argument for something
| elso as well. NORMAN ANGEL.
New YORK, November ~,