The Connecticut labor news., 1921-12-16
Charges That Hearst Would Destroy Arms Conference
Exerting Lnsidious Influence
 For War Asserts Committee

so long as we maintain powerful
 naval defense which no hostile com
 bination will dare to try to break | through
 1 Connected with this animosity to-
 ward England is the repeated sug. 1 gestion that we should never have
 waged war on Germany and we neeC
 a. sufficiently strong anti-British at l titude
 "On this point another Hearst par 1 agraph says:
 "1s it not probable that if we had from the beginning held England tc rigid account enforcing non-lnterfer- ence with lawful American commerce | and vindicating our right to freedom of the seas the rulers of wartime Ger many would never have dared the in l reference on account of which we finally fought?'
 "The editorial apparently forgets that if we had not participated in the war the kaiser would have won it l and imperial Germany would now be dominating Europe.
 "Hearst not only drives forward to particular wars but to war in gen eral and recommends overwhelming
 armament, as in the following from
 the pen of his chief editor, Arthur
 Brisbane:
 While we talk peace and dis
 armament everybody expects another war ,and wonders where it will start
 How plain it Is that our business Is
 ot be prepared, welcoming and trying
 new suggestions for fighting of all kinds
 'Hearst not only tries to persuade his millions of readers to look for ward to war but breaches, in the
 words of one of his editors, the policy of magnificent isolation,' or, in the words employed by Hearst himself, the patriotic policy of America first, America always, America alone
 MT. Hearst does not want a new world but distinctly states in so many words that he favors guiding our policy by our American traditions as he interprets them. Apparently he would have us the only nation in the world which refuses to advance or to learn.
 "The applications of this jingoism are as sinister as the fundamental principles upon which it is based One of his leading writers declares that the crux of the whole problem is the ambitoins of England and Japan to control, monopolize and exploit China, thus regarding England in ex- actly the same light as Jauan! The same writer proceeds to attack France.
 Hearst joyfully accepts the ac- cusations of Frances enemies that she is a militaristic nation. He pats her on the back but he attacks the French position on the question of land dis armament. There must be no naval disarmament without land disarma- ment-a proposition which means one thing in the mouths of opponents of all armament and another in the mouth of an opponent of all disarma- ment The thought is clearly that since there is little proba bility of land disarmament at conference where the land powers are not adequately represented, if Hearst can link dis on land and sea together 1 there will be no disarmament at all! |
 "On this point one of Hearst's l writers says:
 If this conference should attempt l to bind our country to an agreement | upon partial naval disarmament with out any corresponding limitation of ] armaments, then the good i sense of the people and the patriotism ot the Congress must come to the rescue and destroy that one-sided agreement or our America is vicious ly betrayed
 If we have nothing to do with this lop-sided scheme of partial naval disarmament and no military dis armament we can still maintain our rights and interests without war by the men force of our naval prepared ness
 "The General Committee on the Limitation of Armament denounces the efforts of Hearst and the Hearst publications to create distrust of the present international conference and to undermine it's efforts in the direc- ton of world peace. It denounces the efforts of Hearst and the Hearst