erest of that State whose destinies are in their hands. So that the
only hope of relations between nations similar to those that exist
between good men and good women is that the individuals of that nation,
its population, its inhabitants, should consent to exercise the
self-denying virtues; and until that point is reached there can be no
good State in the sense in which there can be a good man. We ought all
to work for it, but it is not here now, and there are no signs on the
horizon of its approach.

In a war, therefore, every statesman studies the resources of his
nation, and when the time comes that it is manifestly his duty to put an
end to warfare, it is only by the public approval that he dares do it,
by showing that it is to their advantage to give up the things for which
they went to war, in greater or less degree.

Armed Peace Not Disarmament.

And the man of shrewd insight, who knows when that point is reached, is
the leader who saves the face, so to speak, of these nations and steps
in and says:

"Now, the whole moral force of the civilized world must be brought to
bear upon you to make a peace, the terms of which, if possible, shall
not discredit any of you, but at the same time shall be as elastic and
as proportionate to your respective gains and losses as will insure at
least a considerable period of peace, not an armistice, not an armed
armistice, though it may be an armed peace."

We see no signs anywhere in Europe that disarmament has any substantial
body of advocates in any nation. The basic principle hitherto of the
German people has been to have, not the largest, but the strongest army;
the basic principle of Great Britain, which sneers at militarism, has
been not only to have the most powerful fleet, but twice the most
powerful fleet.

And what is the basic principle of the United States? The Monroe
Doctrine, to have no armed neighbor which shall compel us to violate by
its presence our dislike for compulsory military service or to expend
great sums for armament.

These are basic principles in each of us. Now, we have been able to
maintain the Monroe Doctrine by simply showing our teeth, but whether we
could maintain it in the future without an armed force sufficient to
give it sanction I think is doubtful, and for that reason the Monroe
Doctrine has undergone quite a number of modifications which I do not
need to explain here.

But this basic principle of ours that from Patagonia to th