The Winslow mail., 1923-05-04
6ECRETARY WEEKS SAYS THEY
MAY WRITE AND TALK ON
PROFESSIONAL SUBJECTS.
HIS REPLY TO THE PACIFISTS
Hits at Organizations That, Being
Really the Foes of National Prepared
ness, He Considers Menace to the
Country's Welfare.
BY EDWARD 3. CLARK

petlllOneu secretary OF War Weeks to
issue an order preventing army officers
from saying or writing anything In be-
half OF national defense.
The secretary has made answer to
the effect that the activities of certain
kinds Of organizations In the United
states are menace to the welfare of
the country, and that army officers
cannot be prohibited from doing their
duty by talking and writing upon pro-
fessiona subjects, a duty to which
they are bound by their oath Of al
1egiance to the republic.
1t Is doubtful If the public generally
realizes all that Is being done In Wash
ington by the representatives Of vari-
BUS groups to prevent the armed serv-
ices Of the country from functioning
properly In the field in which they are
directed by specific acts of congress to
conduct their operations. The organi-
cations which are most active in try
ing to prevent the peace-time function
ing OF the army and navy are naturally
those which call themselves anti-war
groups, but their propaganda matter,
which comes through the mails every
day, shows that they are really anti
preparedness groups. They are not
only trying to prevent any activities
of the United States under the national
defense act but are opposed to having
the army and navy officers declare
themselves as to the necessity of
strengthening this branch and that
branch of either service.
There are several organizations rep
resented in Washington which, while
also against war, stand strongly OPP
posed to the efforts of these other or
CARNATIONS which are trying to secure
the countrys total disarmament with.
out any regard to what may be hap
pening elsewhere in the world, or APP
parently without any regard to the
lessons of the past.
PacifIsts Are Most Militant.
Now, curiously enough, the organ
ized groups which believe In sane pre-
paredness and that the army and navy
should continue its peace-time func-
tons are nothing like so militant in
their endeavors as are the groups
whose endeavor is against everything
which savors of militancy. Because
of this condition the anti-war, anti
preparedness bodies are writing and
speaking fifty words to every one that
Is written or spoken by the organiza-
lions which stand in opposition to
their campaign.
One effort has been to prevent the
War department from carrying through
on anything like an adequate scale
it's plans for summer camps at
which the officers and men of the re-
serve corps are to be given opportunity
to get two weeks outing, and the
chance to brush up little on the les
sons which they learned in the war,
but which since then they may partly
have forgotten. Congress appropriated
money for these camps and the secre-
tary of war directed, as was his duty,
that within the limits of the appropria-
tons the camps should meet all the
requirements In the case.
Before congress sanctioned the ap-
preparations the various organizations
which desire that the United States
shall totally disarm itself, and be I'M
prepared to repel any invader If he
shall come, tried to induce senators
and representatives to negative the
camp appropriation which was re-
Quested Failing in this effort, they
turned their attention to the activities
of the War department, which was act
ing under the law, and turned then
also to the people of the country who
have been told in voluminous articles
that the camps are intended to rouse
a spirit of militarism in the United
States and indirectly to produce war
Gas Service Especially Attacked.
The chemical warfare service or, as
it is briefly called, the gas service, has
been a chief target of attack by the
members of dozen organizations ever
since congress authorized the contin-
uance of that branch Of the service
with Brig. Gen. Amos A. Fries as it's
chief. For some reason or other gas
more than high explosives, more than
submarines, more than airplanes, and
more than any other implement or
material of warfare, has claimed the
attention Of the organizations which,
in brief, want the army and navy
abolished.
Perhaps the most outspoken officer
in defense of this particular service
has been the chief of the chemical
warfare service, General Fries. Moth
ing that he has written shows that he
is an advocate of the use of gas In
warfare for offensive purposes, but vir-
tually everything he has said and writ
ten has been in behalf of the necessity
of being prepared to use gas in case
an enemy should break faith and bring
the stuff into service.
One thing today is seemingly fixed
In the determination Of the secretary