Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1926-08-21
GOOD SENSE AND ARMAMENTs

Speaking at Plattsburg at the
dedication of a memorial to a gall
liant officer who fought in the last
armed struggle between Canada and
the United States, and which all
right-minded people hope will re-
main the last. Secretary of State
Kellogg endeavored to leave no ex-
cuse for a misunderstanding Of this
countrys attitude toward the limita
ton of ornaments, and particularly
what it wishes may be adopted at
the Geneva conference.
Whatever may be the effect of his
words abroad among other parties
to the conference is yet to appear.
German papers evidently think them
wasted on those, who, the writers
profess to believe, have little desire
to restrict armament. There is no
question but they will be unable to
agree upon uniform disarmament of
land forces, indeed the wisdom of
SO doing is doubtful. Evidently
Secretary kellogg recognizes this, as
these words indicate:
LAS regards land ornaments, we
have advocated the desirability OF
starting with regional agreements
which would strike at the root of the
problem by removing from nation
the fear of aggression from its i'm
mediate neighbors. BY progressing
from modest beginnings we are more
likely to go forward to concrete re-
suits than If all nations wait until
some universally applicable scheme
is formulated if such be in fact pos
sible For it, is apparent that uni
versal scheme can only go into eff
feet when all the powers accept it,
and a, glance at the political situa
ton of the world today renders ii
obvious that no scheme, however
perfect, could be applied every
where"
He sees that our geographical
position is such that we may limit
our land forces; he suggests nc
criticism of those peoples less
fortunately situated. He gives all tc
understand that there is no founda-
ton for the rumors that this country
is to withdraw from the Geneva con
~ ference. He asserted there is no in
dication that any of the parties to the
Washington conference are seeking
to scrap the treaties. He fixes at
tention on the kernel of the situa'
ton, the need of removing compet
ton in ornaments. He reminds u
that we never would consent to in
ternational supervision of our arma'
ment. He admits the problem:
under consideration are complicated
He speaks very frankly and forcibly
though disclaiming any intention OF
our part to limit discussion OF th'
various plans.
There Is throughout the address {
lucid presentation of sensible view!
of which the following is a part:
81 believe that the only practica
basis for the reduction or limitation
of armament is through dealing will
military forces and visible Tangible
ornaments. Economic and materia
resources vary so greatly from coun
try to country that it would be wei
night impossible to frame an agree
ment to fit these varied conditions
Industry and economic development
are not static and no nation woult
agree to limit its development il
time of peace or make the reduction
Of It's military establishment depend
upon the state of its industry or tn
extent Of its resources. What pos
sible criterion can we find if w
undertake to base a limitation o
armament agreement upon Thu
economic resources Of every countr,
in the world. I fear that this woult
mean deferring the hope of progress
for an indefinite time