New Britain herald., 1924-07-26

do this by maintaining a large stand,
 lhs aFmN, ] am opposed to any such
 plan, l am ir,ing lO work out .
 method hy watch We can have cen
 slaniik, as se now have an exceeding, ' lN small army and leave our citizens ' free from that burden hy letting them
 sssnme their own responsibility for a
 defensive establishment sufficient Co
 provide for domestic peace and order,
 and national defense,
 ''lRsiead of being military gesture | lhis plan Is ihu exact opposite, II is a miiiiarisiie gesture for lhe nur- ! pose nt keeping down 10 its lowest
 possible polnt thu professional military
 organization of the United States, Our , country has always relied chiefly for l Us defense upon the readiness of its patriotic manhood tn gke m arms when necessity presented, After the great military effort Of the United
 States in the world war, our army was
 demohllized more rapidly and com nletely than that Of any other war
 ring nation,
 Not only lhls, hut the government
 of The United siaes initiated ihe
 Washington canffrenc on limitation
 of armament which brought about
 highly important reductions in the
 naval establishment of the great
 powers, and which sought, though
 without results, to effect also an agreement for reduction Of armies.
 lndiseonrsgod py failure to effect a
 limitation of armies, our governments Ruihnr spokesman have repeatedly since that time declared their wish 10 bring about further consideration Of this quostion, with view 10 accom- plishing a general reduction of armed forces by hand.
 Tn the face of this record. which Is known to all the world. it seems unfair that the plans for defense day should he condemned out of hand, simply through the device of misrep- resentation. Our government Is com pclled 10 confront the realities Of the world. One of these that interna- tional agreement for limitation of armies has not been brought into effect. That being the case our laws provide q small permanent army and contemplate it's expansion 10 meet should they arise.
 "Defenso day is intended 10 bring 10 the people a reminder of their re- lntions to, and dependence upon, this l skeleton defense establishment. in | caso our country be attacked. There | can be no doubt that failure to pre- fA, 1f lime when that possibility was really resulted in great hardship, expense. and the unjusti- fable prolongation of the world war. To state this is but to state what knows. It is desirable that both the public officials who would ,e responsible for the national de- ense, and the people who would have o make the sacrifices 10 maintain if, hould know something of our plans or it.. What is proposed for Septem- 'er 12 is merely compliance with he purposes of the national defense nv of 1920. IL is not mobilization nd the people who first attached to . the term mobilization daE." and hen proceeded 10 condemn if, have cen utterly unfair. Most of them,
 am sure, have been innocent of in- snt 10 be unfair, but they have been lisled.
 Profoundly hoping that the out 'wing of war from this world may : e accomplished, am yet unable to etect any inconsistency in giving my pproval 10 the program of defense [ ay. I wish crime might be abol- he'd; but I would not therefore a polish courts and police protection. V wish war might be made impossi- n e, but would not leave my country f protected meanwhile. The defense st seems 10 me a means to assure e. fullest efficiency 10 the extremely oldest defense force cur country aintains."