Norwich bulletin., 1917-03-17

desire to provide in this country an
 adequate defense, but I have no symp- lathy whatever with his proposal to en- list men by the inducement of higher pay for the protection and defense of other able bodied men of the United Estates. believe that in this great tRepublic I've should not depend upon a hired army. The other day I had oc- casion to state that it was our plain duty to maintain a. fleet sufficient to prevent the transportation of troops any other nation. I believe if we are faithful and energetic in the pursuit of such a policy there will be no need of a large standing army. Our combined military and naval establishment should be organized solely with a view of home protection, and never for the purpose of foreign aggression. (ap- plause.) There is always a risk that a large standing army may be used for defense, and for that reason I have
 been fairly content with the provisions
 of the national-defense act and with
 the provisions of the bill now pending. I am, however, not unmindfuf that
 through the courage and statesman ship of loyal, patriotic Americans in
 the past we have become a great na-
 ton of the world, with ever-widenIng dominion, with eVer-increasing le-
 responsibilities, and I am deeply grateful
 that through their hardships, through
 their sacrifices we have inherited a
 country great and prosperous in all
 tings; rich in agriculture. rich in man.
 ufactures, rich in mineral resources,
 rich in the arts and sciences, rich in
 freedom.
 And now keenly realize that this,
 great national wealth of ours is left
 unprotected, is an element of peril
 when other great nations of the world,
 animated by lust of conquest and
 greed of trade, are arming and equip
 ping by the aid of conscript laws mill
 z<,,< I 1<< <~G Ifw- Ay-r,s
 ed in the art of modern warfare. Our friendly neighbor upon the north will soon have over 500. 900 men, trained vet erans. Our unfriendly neighbor on the
 bandit more or less of a trained sol- dier and there is ever present the poss- ibility that we may not be able to maintain control of the ocean so as to troops to our shores. So now I be- lieve that our traditional military poll icy 50 much praised by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. McKellar) the other day, our traditional military poll icy which heretofore has been suc- cessfuI, of no large standing army and of reliance solely upon a civilian pop. ulation formerly somewhat trained in proved and brought up to date in a most radical manner. The experience of England in this war has demonstrated that a civilian without previous m.ii- tary training is absolutely worthless for immediate use as a soldier. I be- Heve that we should now adopt the poll icy of military training for all young States, enlistments to be limited to men in the regular army of the United one year, denying to privates and per haps to corporals the privilege of re- enlistment. In this way there will be a. chance for all, and yet there will be no large permanent standing army. The youth of our country are compelled to go to school for years without pay for their own good and for the good of society. Therefore, I hold that they should be compelled to serve with merely nominal pay, certainly not higher pay, for another year in the military service of their country I believe that this policy could be adopt the Nation at large. I believe that this one year of training in the regular army will never be forgotten and that the lessons of loyalty. of patriotism. of obedience to constituted authority will cilians, better equipped in every way to will make them more ready, more call in their country hour of need. Experience has shown that a man over the age of 21 years, is apt to weigh altogether too nicely the dis comforts and perils of war.
 have been informed that in our Civil War in the Union Army there were more en1istments of boys under the age of 16 than there were of men