of annexation to France, the plebiscite to be under the control of some neutral committee. Should France mark off too large a section, she might gain nothing. Should she be modest in her attempt, she might acquire some territory adjacent to her frontier where French sympathy prevails, as that naturally predominates along the present border, and shades off as remoter parts are reached.1

A Decisive Victory Unfavorable for Enduring Peace The time to intorduce this plan is the present, while the fate of Europe is in the balance and before either of the contending sides has won such a decisive victory that it will assert the right to maintain peace by predominant armed force.

It can, at least, be perceived that neither belligerent will succeed in reducing the other so as to keep it down by force for even a generation.

The assurance of a sweeping victory is not so strong on either side as to justify the one or the other in incurring, say, again the amount of indebtedness already made, in the hope of accomplishing it; and no nation, no generation, can justify the imposition of such a burden upon its posterity, for there is where it will rest, when complete relief can be had by a plan that is practically the cessation of expenditures for armed protection and the diversion of the energy saved into economic channels, not to mention the greatest consideration- the immediate termination of

(1) To this idea President Wilson aptly applied the term "selfdetermination." It was followed in fixing the German-Schleswig boundary, which is probably the only new one that will endure.

The delimitations of the new Europeon States rest on the "self determination" of the diplomats at Versailles; and consequently, instability.

the war with its further destruction and maiming of men. A peace on land secured by the military domination of Germany, or on the sea, by the naval rule of Britain, would be so humiliating and intolerable that it would only last. until powers could combine to break it by a still greater war. Should the German navy be crushed, even France would not like to be told that thereafter it would be expected that her navy would remain in the Mediterranean. No nation should dominate. We have reached the state of civilization where intelligent judgment should rule.

As nations are not yet ready to depend upon the sense of right in the condemned to see that the punishments meted out to them are inflicted, any more than in the case of the individual, and cannot maintain orderly governments without enforcing obligations and inflicting penalties for the infraction of rights, a sanction by force is necessary. This force should be commensurate with the nation's economic strength, in navy and army, if the game is to remain one of war; but it is fortunate that the situation of nations to each other is such that a coercive power, free from physical force, contains even greater potency.

Would it not be better for America to utilize the great financial advantage that she still enjoys, to achieve by direct methods the result that all nations are seeking: namely, the abolition of armaments? It would cost America far less to use a portion of the means that she is now dissipating in the war did she purchase the navies of the world, using in part payment the loans recently made, and scrap them; and even, in addition, did she contribute largely to the rehabilitation of the countries devastated by the war. Instead of wasting her means in a cause in which many of her people do not sympathize, she would thereby

express the feeling of the best of her citizens, that they did not wish to amass wealth through the misfortunes of the Allies, or other people. In such a work, however, Japan, which has gained greatly by the war, should join America. In the building up and maintenance of the present system of armed peace, America is also responsible. Without having made any serious and direct effort to achieve the end herein advocated, she has for years been laying down, keel for keel, cruisers and battleships to equal those being built by France or Germany, and even disputing the second place with France until the latter was outdistanced by Germany, with the result, which, it at least now can be seen, was inevitable. She, however, is still in a position where, if she will but take the lead in the opposite direction. all belligerents will hasten to join her.

At the present time, a bare offer to mediate between the belligerents, or to declare an armistice for the purpoes of considering terms of peace, is hardly possible, as the advantage would accrue chiefly to the one side in giving it needed time for preparations, the progress of which could not be absolutely stayed. Wherefore, the desirability of having a plan, that can be studied, quickly grasped and accepted in principle while the struggle continues, is apparent.

The great object of the war from all sides is the establishment of international relations on an orderly and permanent basis; and the rational way to achieve it is to work from the earliest moment upon a plan with that objeot directly in view, so that the minds of the people of both belligerents may be focused and kept upon it, and not overcome by agitation at the atrocities of the war, when intelligent action ceases. It should be realized that there

are no means that arouse and sustain resentment as readily as the employment of brute force to impose one's will.

The time to make use of such a plan has arrived; for, did it prescribe such guarantees as would be considered sufficient for securing this world relationship, the way out of the war could be discerned. With it as a guide for future adjustment, consents could quickly be had that would end it. Indeed, answers to two questions concerning paramount interests, but which about balance each other, could, and, if made, would now be given that would lead speedily to its termination:

Would England be satisfied to end the conflict should Germany disband her army, and would Germany be satisfied should England abandon her navy? Such a result would clear away the greatest of the underlying causes of of the war, the recognized menaces to each, and permit both sides to retire not only without injury to national pride, but with the feeling on the part of each that a gain had been obtained sufficient to compensate for the great cost. This would be the only basis of peace that would be worth while: one leaving no great rancor, and thereby containing the promise of endurance.

The co-operation of both belligerents is essential for the establishment and maintenance of any future relationship that is to endure.

The mechanical method of battering may continue for years without result, while chemical treatment-may we call it by removing the cause, the necessity for arms, will force militaristic governments to disappear like snow under a hot sun, as people will not support such governments when they feel that there is no need for them, and autocracies cannot exist without military power.

Conclusion

International relationship is governed more than most men conceive, by the attitude of mind; and if a country is without fear, as it does not see in its neighbors its possible slayers, and the possible invaders of its territory, because they are not armed, and feels that it can have a fair trial in a court of arbitration and the award enforced, it needs no military establishment.

The fact that in none of the American States is the need felt of arming as against its neighbors, or as against Canada, is good proof of this proposition; the same fact in regard to the American colonies, upon the establishment of the United States, is better, as they differed much in origin; and still better, is that to be found in Switzerland, which for centuries has been composed of people of three races, each of which still retains its language and customs and its section of the country. The paramount endeavor of each group is to support the federation, as each is conscious of the fact that its own strength depends upon the effective operation of the whole.

While many are now willing to place reliance in moral sanction, and it is confidently believed that the attitude of mind above mentioned would almost always justify such reliance, still to follow Lincoln's saying, it must be admitted, that, while moral sanction would suffice to restrain all of the nations part of the time, and part of the nations all of the time, it is doubtful if it would restrain all of the nations all of the time; and so, as in municipal legislation, penalties must be set, not for the law-abiding, but for the law-breaking part of the community. Nations, too, could not be induced to disarm without some stronger