But what avail, it may be asked, is it to dwell upon our past military
mistakes? None, certainly, unless we are capable as a people of
profiting by the school of experience. Thus far, in the matter under
discussion, our national good luck, inducing, as it has done, a quite
unwarranted feeling of security, has prevented us from doing so. That
we are permanently incapacitated from guiding our feet by the lamp of
experience, however, the writer at least does not believe. To a
limited extent, indeed, in the conduct of the present war, we have
already evinced a willingness to avoid repeating our past mistakes.
The question of preparation in advance of the conflict aside, the
preliminary stage of the current war has been waged in materially
better fashion than has that of any of our previous wars. In
particular the principle of universal liability to service has been
adopted and an earnest effort has been made to provide as officers,
men who combine with a high degree of natural capacity at least a
modicum of training for the work intrusted to their charge.
These things are well enough in their way, and encouraging as
indicative of the development of a more intelligent attitude on the
part of our people toward the conduct of the military arm of the
government. No longer, apparently, can a runaway boy of sixteen
convince a secretary of war, as in the old days, that his desire for a
commission in the army entitles him to precedence over graduates of
West Point; nor will we again witness the spectacle of our president
appointing all the officers of a newly-created military unit direct
from civil life on the ground that the country “generally expected”
our trained soldiers should thus be ignored. However gratifying this
may be, the nub of the present situation lies in the fact that
whatever has been done thus far has been with a view solely to meeting
a present emergency. The country has not determined upon, and the
government has not adopted any permanent or general policy. Sooner or
later the present war will end. Shall we then, as in 1815 and 1865,
disband our military force and have recourse once more to the old
policy of trusting to Providence for the protection of our liberty and
our existence as a nation? Or shall we now highly resolve that the
destinies of the American people are too precious, that the success of
our great experiment in democracy is charged with too much importance,
not alone to ourselves but to the remainder of mankind as well, to
justify us in leaving it absolutely unprotected in a world of
potential enemies? What would be thought today of a city which should
maintain no police department, and for protection against fire should
depend upon the unorganized efforts of volunteers? Scarcely two
centuries ago, however, even the chief city of the world had no police
department, while within the memory of men now living our cities
depended upon volunteers for protection against fire.
In these matters the obvious lesson of experience has been thoroughly
learned. Professional police and fire departments are the standing
armies of our cities, highly organized and constantly alert to protect
them from the perils of disorder and fire. The American people will
not permanently be content to display a lower order of intelligence in
national affairs than it does in those of merely municipal concern.
Too long, however, have we confided the protection of our national
existence to Providence. We believe it to be the duty of every citizen
to exert the full measure of his influence upon his governmental
representatives to the end that now, before national disaster shall
have overtaken us, a permanent military policy adequate to our
protection be adopted.