Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-11-12

has never proved sufficient. We do not
know of any nation which has ever
been able to provide arms enough Sc
as always to be at peace.
Examples in Europe.
Fifteen years ago the most thoroughly
equipped people of Europe were Ger
many and France. We saw what hap
pened. While Rome maintained gen
eral peace for many generations, II
was not without running conflict on
the borders which finally engulted the
empire. But there is wide distinction
between absolute prevention and ire
Quent recurrence, and peace Is OF Httle
value if it is constantly accompanied
by the threatened or the actual VIOLA
ton of national rights.
If the European countries had neg
lected their defenses. it is probable that
war would have come much sooner. All
human experience seems to demon
strate that a country which makes rea-
sonable preparation for defense is less
likely to be subject to hostile attack
and less likely to suffer a violation OF
its rights which might lead to war.
This is the prevailing attitude OF the
United States and one which l beileVe
should constantly determine its actions.
To be ready for defense is not to be
guilty of aggression. We can have MILL
tary preparation without assuming a
military spirit 1t is our duty to our
selves and to the cause OF clv!llzatlon,
to the preservation of domestic tran
guilty. to our orderly and lawful rela-
tons with foreign people, to maintain
an adequate Army and Navy.
Position of Army.
We do not need a large land force.
The present size of our Regular Army
is entirely adequate, but it should con-
thu to be supplemented by National
Gua. 1 end Reserves, and especially with
the equipment and organization IN our
il It's. les for furnishing supplies.
Vr-n we turn to the sea the situa-
tion : different. We have not only a
long astline, distant outlying pcsses--
sions, a foreign commerce unsurpassed
in Importance, and foreign investments
UNSURPASSED in amount, the number OF
our people and value of our treasure
to be protected, but we are also bound
by international treaty to defend the
Panama Canal.
Having few fueling stations, we re-
uuire ships of large tonnage, and hav-
ing scarcely any merchant vessels ca
pable of mounting five or six inch guns,
it is obvious that, based on needs. we
are entitled to a larger number of war
ships than a nation having these ad-
vantageS.
Important, however, as we have be-
lieved adequate national defense to be
for preserving order and peace IN the
world. we have not considered it to be
the only element. We have most
i
fully advocated the principle of the
this should apply both to land and sea
forces. but as the limitation of armies
is very largely a European question we
have wished the countries most in
terested to take the lead in deciding
this among themselves.
Called Arms Conference.
For the purpose of naval limitation
We called the Washington conference
and secured an agreement as to capital
ships and airplane carriers, and also
as to the maximum unit tonnage and
maximum caliber of guns of cruisers.
But the number of cruisers, lesser
craft and submarines have no limit.
1t no doubt has some significance
that foreign governments made agree
ments limiting that class of combat
vessels in which we were superior, but
refused limitation in the class in which
they were superior. We made alto
gether the heaviest sacrifice in scrap
ping work which was already in ex-
istence. That should forever remain
not only a satisfaction to ourselves,
but a demonstration to others of our
good faith in advocating the principle
of limitations.
At that time we had % cruisers and
10 more nearly completed. One of
these has since been lost, and % are
nearly obsolete. To replace these, We
have started building 8. The British
have since begun and completed 7. are
building 8, and have more authorized.
When their present legislation is car
ried out, they would have SO cruisers.
When ours is carried out, We would
have 40. 1t is obvious that. eliminat-
ing all competition, world standards of
defense require us to have more
cruisers.
Second Farley on Ships.
This was the situation when re-
quested another conference, which the
British and Japanese attended, but to
which italy and France did not come