CHAPTER XII

THE GOOD AND EVIL OF PEACE AND OF WAR

"All states are in perpetual war with all. For that which we

call peace is no more than merely a name, whilst in reality

Nature has set all communities in an unproclaimed but

everlasting war against each other." _Plato._

So much has been said based on ignorance and false premise about the

good and evil of war, and the good and evil of peace, that a few cold,

relevant facts will not be out of place here.

In stating these facts, the writer is standing neither as sponsor for

war nor as sponsor for peace. He is not posing as a judge qualified to

pass sentence on peace or on war, but merely as one who understands the

subject sufficiently to throw some new light upon it. In bearing witness

to the cruelty and mercilessness of Nature, the writer assumes no

responsibility for what Nature has done; he was not consulted. In

bearing witness to the evils and benefits of war, and the evils and

benefits of peace, the writer does not thereby either palliate the

evils, or stand responsible for them; neither does he assume credit for

their benefits and blessings. He realizes, however, that the bearer of

bad tidings is associated with the ill-feeling they inspire, although he

may be wholly innocent of the ill.

While too much stress cannot be laid upon the horrors of war and the

individual suffering incurred thereby, still it is not just to lay to

the account of war or militarism every ill that flesh is heir to, as is

done by many of the pacifi-maniacs. As a matter of fact, it would be as

justifiable to attack peace because of the evils that develop in times

of peace. We do not, however, on that account conceive peace to be a

misfortune, but a blessing.

While our pacifists promote war by their teachings, they declaim against

war and picture its horrors and calamitous results. One would naturally

suppose that, appreciating what a terrible thing war is, they would take

the most scientific and dependable means of safeguarding this country

against such a calamity; but, as a matter of fact, they are doing

everything in their power to abolish the one means that can safeguard us

against war. With consistent inconsistency, they place the blame for war

on the advocates of adequate armaments--the true peace-advocates and

peace-makers and enemies of war, who are forefending us against war. The

advocacy of armaments is construed by them as the advocacy of war;

measures for peace are confounded with measures for breaching the peace.

A curious phase of the matter is that many friends of armaments

themselves make a similar mistake, and think that in defending armaments

they are called upon to defend war also. As a matter of fact, war has no

defense, except as a last resort. But when there is no other way, and

when the maintenance of peace would be a greater calamity than war, then

war is to be recommended as the lesser evil. It is, nevertheless,

undeniably an evil, though a necessary one, just as a surgical operation

is a necessary evil--but one which, if successful, results in such good

as far to outweigh the evil.

The peace sophists tell us that there has never been a good war or a bad

peace; that always in war the best specimens of manhood have been slain,

leaving the weak and unfit for breeding purposes. They tell us that the

Napoleonic wars lowered the stature of the entire French nation by two

inches. They tell us also that during all past ages war for plunder has

been the principal business of mankind.

The following arraignment of war by General Hiram M. Chittenden is a

very fair sample of this method of reasoning:

* * * * *

"_Both in its restriction upon marriage and in its destruction of life

war thus destroys the most precious seed and leaves the inferior from

which to propagate. In proportion as wars are long continued, and draw

heavily upon the population, these deleterious effects are apparent. The

campaigns of Napoleon were a mighty drain upon the vigor of the French

people. It has been held that the average stature of the French was

thereby diminished by more than an inch. How much their intellectual and

moral stature was shrunken by that debauchery of crime, who can say? The

decadence of the Roman people was due more to the waste of its best

blood in war than to the causes commonly accepted. War reverses the

process of natural selection and, instead of producing the survival of

the fittest, produces the survival of the most unfit._"

* * * * *

According to statistics of the pacifists, from the year 1496 B.C. to the

year 1861 A.D.--a period of 3,357 years--there were 227 years of peace

and 3,130 years of war--thirteen years of war for every year of peace.

Now, if what we are told about the degenerative effects of war is true,

since we know that war has been prevalent in all ages, the natural

conclusion is, what a lot of rapscallions we must be! If war, instead of

tending to secure the survival of the fit, secures the survival of the

unfit, then after a thousand centuries of strife we must be signally

unfit.

The trouble with such statistics is that, instead of leading us toward

the truth, they lead us into error. It may be perfectly true that for

every year of general peace there have been thirteen years when there

was a war somewhere on the earth; but this does not imply in the least

that peace was not more general than was war, even during those thirteen

years when there was a war. We must remember that the history of nations

does not tell us much about the affairs of the people in times of peace;

it is their wars that have made history.

As we look back through time at the large number of wars, we clump them

together in perspective. We place the wars, as it were, all on the map

at once, instead of placing them years and centuries apart.

Just as there is always in human life more joy than sorrow, more

pleasure than pain, more good than ill; so, in the history of the world,

there has been more of peace and prosperity than there has been of war

and calamity.

John Ruskin possessed the rare ability to perceive truth that pointed

one way, while his feelings pointed in the opposite direction. Although

he had an emotional nature and a highly artistic temperament, he was

still a man of so broad views, with so comprehensive a mind at the other

end of the optic nerve, that he could ratiocinate in spite of his

emotions. The following is what he had to say on war:

* * * * *

"_All the pure and noble arts of peace are founded on war; no great art

ever rose on earth but among a nation of soldiers. There is no great art

possible to a nation but that which is based on battle. When I tell you

that war is the foundation of all the arts, I mean also that it is the

foundation of all the high virtues and faculties of men. It was very

strange for me to discover this, and very dreadful, but I saw it to be

quite an undeniable fact. The common notion that peace and the virtues

of civil life flourished together I found to be utterly untenable. Peace

and the vices of civil life only flourish together. We talk of peace and

learning, of peace and plenty, of peace and civilization; but I found

that these are not the words that the Muse of History coupled together:

that on her lips the words were peace and sensuality, peace and

selfishness, peace and death. I found in brief that all great nations

learned their truth of word and strength of thought in war; that they

were nourished in war and wasted in peace; taught by war and deceived by

peace; trained by war and betrayed by peace; in a word, that they were

born in war and expired in peace._"

* * * * *

We must not conclude, from the above quotation from Ruskin, that he was

an advocate of brutality versus humanity, for he was not. The thought he

meant to convey was simply this--that only a supreme trial, a supreme

responsibility, where country, life itself, and that which is dearer

than life--home--are staked on the issue, can bring out the highest

virtues. The struggle for inalienable human rights, whose observance is

freedom, has been the greatest influence to stimulate the genius and the

virtues of men, and these things have been accomplished, and could only

have been accomplished, by war.

The humanity of Ruskin is well brought out in the following quotation:

* * * * *

"... _Depend upon it, all work must be done at last, not in a

disorderly, scrambling, doggish way, but in an ordered, soldierly, human

way--a lawful or 'loyal' way. Men are enlisted for the labor that

kills--the labor of war: they are counted, trained, fed, dressed, and

praised for that. Teach the plough exercise as carefully as you do the

sword exercise, and let the officers of troops of life be held as much

gentlemen as the officers of troops of death; and all is done: but

neither this, nor any other right thing, can be accomplished--you can't

even see your way to it--unless, first of all, both servant and master

are resolved that, come what will of it, they will do each other

justice._"

* * * * *

Ralph Waldo Emerson held the same opinion about war as that held by John

Ruskin. He quoted and approved the old Greek, Heraclitus, who said,

"War is the father of all things." After quoting this expression,

Emerson said, "We of this day can repeat it as a political and social

truth." Also, he said, "War passes the power of all chemical solvents,

breaking up the old cohesions, and allowing the atoms of society to take

a new order."

As a matter of fact, social order, in time of peace, like a cultivated

field, settles and solidifies, and it must be broken down into subsoil,

to support a new and vigorous growth. The breaking by plough and

dynamite, uprooting and submerging all undesirable growth, is rewarded

by healthy and vigorous crops of a desirable growth.

The very privations that have to be endured by large numbers of persons

during a great war, stimulate economy, invention, and extraordinary

endeavor, and serve to teach many useful lessons and to impart valuable

experiential knowledge, which is applied both during the war, and, with

greater advantage, when the war is over. When a country is at war, all

its industries are not rendered stagnant or idle, but many of them are

stimulated to extraordinary effort when cut off from import by blockade.

The legend about the stature of the French nation being lowered two

inches as a result of killing off so many of the best men of France

during the Napoleonic wars, is a very plausible one, and one that has

been made great use of by the pacifists. But no one has thought to

inquire whether or not, during the past century, the average stature of

the Spaniards and the Italians also has been lowered. Perhaps, if we

should inquire, we might learn that the color of the hair and eyes and

skin of the French had somewhat darkened during that period. We might

learn the truth that the effect upon the stature and the color of the

eyes and skin and hair was mainly due to another kind of warfare--that

of the southern blood of the Latin against the blood of the blond

Norseman. We might learn that in Italy, Spain, and France, the posterity

of the Norse giants, who long ago overran and conquered those countries,

did not thrive well there, but slowly died down. We might learn that in

those lands the blood of the blond is gradually overcome by the blood of

the brunette; and that, as the blond races are larger in stature, the

stature of the mixed Latin races is lowered in proportion to the

disappearance of the blond type. The ancient Roman was much shorter in

stature than even the present Italian or Frenchman.

Warfare has always subjected the weak, the puny, the poor, the ill, the

indigent, and the incompetent to privations, trials, and strains of such

severity that they have died in large numbers. They have not been so

able as normal persons to escape the sword and to resist famine and

disease; consequently, fewer of them have survived than of the more

fit.

It is, however, argued by the peace sophists, that in modern warfare

only the most able-bodied men are selected for military duty, and also

that the weak and unfit who remain at home are not subjected to the same

exterminating influences as formerly.

As a matter of fact, comparing the results of war today with those in

former years, we find the percentage of deaths among the incompetent

stay-at-homes far larger than among the soldiers at the front.

It is true that medical science secures the survival of a much larger

percentage of stay-at-home incompetents than in former years, but

medical science saves also a much larger proportion of those injured in

battle than formerly, so that the ratio of survival between the fit and

the incompetent is today in favor of the fit. The conditions that tend

to secure the survival of the fittest are even more effective today than

they were in old-time wars.

The unpleasant truth should be realized that invading armies must, with

other luxuries, have women. As a result, they leave a large

progeny--wrens in the nests of the doves of peace. Hence, inasmuch as

soldiers are the pick of the manhood of their country, they are likely

to do about as much toward securing the survival of the fit in an

enemy's country as they would have in their own country.

There is another very important consideration, which is that war is a

great mixer of races, and that usually mixed types benefit enormously

from their compound blood.

Furthermore, the mingling of races and peoples has in all times served

greatly to spread knowledge of one another, and they have always

profited largely from the mingled knowledge. Soldiers visiting distant

lands have brought home acquaintance with new arts and sciences and

broader ideas of international usefulness. The soldiers of the North,

who marched with Sherman through Georgia to the sea, returned years

afterward and built cotton mills, iron foundries, and machine-shops all

over the South, and stimulated the South with Northern energy and

Northern capital.

We know that the inhabitants of the earth are constantly growing more

fit; consequently, we know that they cannot be growing constantly more

unfit, due to the degenerative influence of war. The history of nations

is a history of wars; consequently we know as untrue the contention of

the peace sophists that war secures the survival of the unfit. We know

that exactly the opposite must be true; that war secures the survival of

the fit.

There is yet another thing of which the peace sophists have never

thought, and could not be expected to think--the tremendous self-saving

potentiality of the race.

As I have pointed out elsewhere, Nature seems to care little for

individuals, but everything for a race or species; consequently, Nature

has forefended herself by very ample measures to insure the survival of

the fit.

If every able-bodied man in the world today were to be slain, and only

the weak and puny left, although the injury would be incalculable and

would make the whole race stagger, still the next generation of men

would be almost as able-bodied and as fit as the present generation. Let

us see why: It is because of that great potentiality--atavism. Children

inherit not only directly from their parents, but their inheritance

harks back to grandfather, great-grandfather, and even to remote

ancestry.

Just as a stream of water burdened with impurities is self-purifying

when it suns itself on the bright pebbles and on grass and moss that web

and tangle it, so life is self-purifying and self-regenerative. Nature

is constantly reaching higher and higher. The acquired characteristics

of parents tend to become instinctive in their children. Instinct is

largely inherited experience.

Nature strives to protect herself against degeneracy. Though bad conduct

on the part of parents harmfully affects the child, yet such influences

are less potent than those that are regenerative. If this were not

true, Nature's ends would not be so well secured.

There is in all animal organisms a certain innate power of resistance to

germs of disease, and there is likewise in man a similar power of

resistance to degeneracy.

The forces that operate to protect the individual operate also to shield

the species by affording protection against evil inheritance.

Abnormal types are not always representative of diseased or degenerate

conditions; other considerations must be weighed. Even some criminals

may be atavic examples of a class of individuals who were better suited

to live under the savage conditions that existed many generations ago.

Nature has resources for her protection far beyond our ken. Some of them

have, by our inquiry, been discovered. We have discovered that not only

do we immunize ourselves to withstand repeated attacks from the same

disease, but also our children to some extent inherit that immunity.

When syphilis, the most abominable disease that ever afflicted mankind,

was brought to Europe by the sailors of Columbus, the Europeans,

possessing no immunity against it, died by hundreds of thousands. It

afflicted equally all classes, from peasant to king. This disease among

the West Indian tribes was slow-moving, and comparatively mild; but it

became exceedingly virulent, rapid, and almost always fatal, in the

blood of the unimmunized people of the Old World. This disease alone has

been more harmful to the human race than all the wars of the world since

the dawn of human history.

Although today the Old-World races have acquired considerable immunity

to that affliction and although science has discovered a rational and

comparatively successful treatment, it is still the greatest single

degenerative influence with which the race has to contend. Its evil

potency is greatly enhanced by the facility with which it weds

alcoholism, and breeds tuberculosis, cancer, and paranoia.

The old pioneers sowed the western continent and the islands of the sea

with the germs of smallpox and measles. Smallpox, terrible anywhere, was

tenfold more so with the newly discovered peoples. Measles was more

fatal with the Indians than smallpox with the Europeans. Only recently,

in Alaska, whole communities have been wiped out by the measles. Even

chicken-pox, harmless with us, was nearly always fatal to the

inhabitants of the Pacific Islands.

The races, however, gradually but surely, developed immunity, and the

great world-scourges are now largely robbed of their terrors. Similarly

has mankind developed powers of recuperation that largely tend to

immunization against such degenerative effects as are of war.

When a large limb is lopped from a tree, the mother-stem puts out a new

shoot, and grows another strong limb in its place; similarly, when limbs

are lopped from the human family tree, new limbs are stimulated to

growth. This peculiarity of living things is strangely manifested in

certain species, particularly among the lower orders of animals. Certain

animals have no way of seeking self-preservation except by breeding in

such large numbers as to supply the appetites of all enemies, and glut

the demand. A big salmon sometimes lays a gallon of small eggs, often

numbering as high as 27,000,000. Certain species of polyp are provided

no means whatever, either by speed or powers of resistance, to defend

themselves, but they breed so rapidly that they cannot all be eaten.

* * * * *

Now that we have defended war against the charge of securing the

survival of the unfit, and have proved that, on the contrary, war has,

during all the ages, been instrumental in securing the survival of the

fit, let us, without presuming against peace, see whether or not peace

has a blameless record.

The long periods of peace during the past century have allowed the

peoples time and opportunity to acquire wealth and luxury, and to

develop peculiar tastes, especially along emotional lines.... Modern

fiction is a universal love story. Art is largely a portrayal of

sentimentality.

In olden times, when human suffering in every guise, born of war, was

very common, the appeals of the poor, the weak, and the infirm were not

much heeded, for there were ever present such severe and exacting

concerns as to command the attention and to absorb the resources of the

people.

In time of peace less rigid economy is practised than in time of war.

Dangers and hardships, which are the concomitants of war, have been

found in all ages better formative influences for making hardy,

successful men than a life of ease, comfort, and luxury. Consequently,

in time of peace there is a far more preponderant tendency toward

degeneracy and national decay than there is in time of war, in spite of

the large numbers of fine specimens of manhood that are killed in war.

When Cyrus the Great, with his hardy mountaineers, had conquered the

peace-loving, comfort-loving people of the lowlands, he told his

soldiers that they must not make their homes in the lowlands, but must

return to their mountain fastnesses, because if they settled to a life

of ease and luxury, they would become unwarlike, effeminate, and

degenerate, like the lowlanders they had conquered and enslaved, and

later would themselves be conquered and enslaved by other mountaineers

inured to privations and hardships, who would descend upon them.

Witness the wisdom of Herodotus, who said:

* * * * *

"_It is the settled appointment of Nature that soft soils should breed

soft men, and that the same land should never be famous for the

excellence of its fruit and for the vigor of its inhabitants._"

* * * * *

Montesquieu said:

* * * * *

"_The barrenness of the soil makes men industrious, sober, hard-working,

courageous, and warlike, for they must obtain by their own exertion that

which the earth denies them, whilst the fertility of a country produces

in them love of ease, indolence, and a sense of cautious

self-preservation._"

* * * * *

The ancient Spartans in time of peace voluntarily subjected themselves

to every privation and hardship necessary to keep them in prime

condition for instant war.

Nature is never moved by pity. Nature is not a sentimentalist. The

earthquake shock is no respecter of persons. When a ship founders, the

angry waves of the sea show no mercy to the drowning, and have no pity

for those struggling to survive in the life-boats. The arctic airs of

winter are as savage to those exposed to them as are the teeth of

wolves. All animal life on the earth must constantly contend with both

the devouring elements of Nature and the devouring greed of other animal

life.

Pity is a child of the imagination, and is, for that reason, a

peculiarly human attribute. It is a very noble trait, and is of material

aid in greatening mutual human usefulness. Nevertheless, no one thinks

for a moment of blaming any of the lower animals for their appetites and

passions; they are understood to be normal and necessary. Similarly, all

our normal appetites and passions are necessary. Considered in the

broad, as natural attributes, there are no such things as bad normal

emotions and passions; it is only when they become perverted by

degeneracy or abuse that they are evil.

The passion of pity may be perverted and abused just as the sex appetite

or the appetite for food and drink.

If human pity had dominated the council at the creation of the world,

the result would have been infinite injury, because none of the higher

orders of animals, even man himself, could have been developed. In

short, there would have been no intelligent beings on earth.

During periods of peace, a large number of persons, moved by pity for

the indigent, the halt, the lame, the blind, extend to them the

alleviating hand of charity. Philanthropy finds favor in the public

eye, and charity becomes a cheap and easy means of courting public

opinion. The philanthropist with means for gratifying his passion of

pity, or the ambitious aspirant for public favor with cash to invest in

public opinion, finds himself soon surrounded with a multitude of

itchy-palmy hands to help him spend his money to buy what he is after,

and at the same time obtain profit for themselves. Consequently, objects

of charity become opportunities to be prized and made the most of.

Charity organizations are supported both by well-meaning sympathetic

persons and by publicity-purchasing persons and their press-agents.

Many an ambitious politician or social climber finds it profitable to

become a patron of some supposedly deserving charity. Recently, some one

inquired into the methods of a New York charity organization, and found

that the sum paid in salaries to the various officers of the society was

more than twice the amount actually expended in charity. But those who

donated the money got what they paid for; the hangers-on of the society

got what they wanted, and thereby lessened the actual harm that the

money would have done had it all reached its supposed objects.

While a limited amount of well-directed charitable effort may be for the

general good, still by far the larger part of promiscuous charity does

harm. Broadly speaking, charity of all kinds is wrong in principle,

because the misfortunes of the unfit are a part of natural processes

for their elimination, and anything done by charity to defeat the

decrees of Nature is wrong.

These are some of the responsibilities for which we friends of peace

must stand, if we succeed in preventing war by preparedness against war.

Those who are advocating the abolition of armaments, and are thereby

fostering war, have not this responsibility; for, if they are successful

in what they are teaching and doing, the pretty constant warfare that

will prevail among the great nations during the next century will cure

much of the hypersentimentalism that finds expression in large

degenerative charities; and these charities will be swept away under the

tread of marching armies. Whereas, if we succeed, by our advocacy, in

securing adequate armaments, and thereby maintain enduring peace, then

nothing can prevent our great promiscuous charities from continuing to

secure the survival of the unfit with the continuous pollution of the

blood-stream of the race from their degenerate blood through

intermarriage with normal persons.

The arrestation of the self-purifying processes of Nature which are

intended to clarify the blood of the race, by breeding the unfit and

turning them back upon the race, is like turning the sewage of a city

into its water supply.

If all incompetents--the hopelessly diseased and degenerate--were to be

exterminated, it would be a very good thing for the race. Such methods

have actually been practised in the past. At one time, when ancient

Babylon was besieged, all the aged and diseased were murdered; and in

ancient Greece, deformed or diseased children were killed at birth. But

the trouble with this method is that no men possessing the human

qualities rendering them worthy of survival could be found among us to

do the wholesale executions. The mere possession of the inhuman

qualities necessary to carry out the wholesale slaughter would elect the

executioners themselves for slaughter. Man cannot be pitiless, like

Nature, without himself becoming unworthy of pity, and, consequently,

unworthy of survival.

Human survival must be co-operative. Human reproduction depends somewhat

on lovability. According to the law of natural selection, a lovable

person is selected rather than an unlovable person. Neither sex is so

apt to fall in love and mate with a person of the other sex who is

pitiless, as with one possessing pity and sympathy. Pity and sympathy,

just like the love of parenthood, are bonds of the family. A

community--a nation--is only a larger family.

Charity and sympathy make men gregarious. A world without charity or

sympathy would be most unattractive. Human companionship in its higher

values would not exist.

Nevertheless, when charity and sympathy build and support large

almshouses, until, as in London, one-third of all the property tax goes

to the poor fund, then charity becomes an institution for breeding

paupers and imbeciles. Such charity is the misuse of a virtue.

Nine-tenths of all the paupers of one generation in England are children

of the paupers of a preceding generation.

The following is what an eminent Englishman has to say of the condition

of things in his country:

* * * * *

"_We have a standing army of 1,200,000 paupers, and our permanent and

occasional paupers number together at least 3,000,000. Our paupers are

maintained at a yearly cost of about L30,000,000 to the community, and

were it not for the Draconic administration of our poor-laws all our

work-houses would be overcrowded by workers who would gladly exchange

freedom and starvation wages for the confinement of the workhouse. No

other nation has an army of paupers similar to that of Great

Britain."--J. Ellis Barker,_ in "_Great and Greater Britain._"

* * * * *

A CAT STORY

Once upon a time there was an excellent Queen who ruled over a beautiful

and fruitful island. The island was not large; it had an area of only a

few square miles, and the inhabitants numbered but a thousand. They

lived mainly by fishing and agriculture.

The Queen loved both her people and her cats. As she would not allow a

kitten killed, cats soon overran the palace. Some of these cats,

dominated by the mousing instinct, took up their habitation in the

fields and woods; for mice, small birds, squirrels, and all manner of

cat-game were plentiful on the island.

The cats continued to multiply, until they became a great pest to the

farmers, killing their chickens, ducklings, and song-birds. Then the

good Queen divided the island between her people and her cats. She gave

a tenth of the island to the cats. A fence was built between the cats

and the people.

The cats soon multiplied to the number of 20,000, but there was not

forage enough to feed them through the next winter; consequently, half

of them died during the cold weather. In the autumn of the following

year there were again 20,000 cats on the island, half of which were

doomed to die by starvation during the winter; but the kind-hearted

Queen taxed the people for food sufficient to feed the cats, and to save

as many lives as possible.

The succeeding summer being long and fruitful, the cats thrived well,

and the next autumn there were 50,000 cats on the island, and as there

was but forage enough to winter 10,000 cats, 40,000 must starve during

the coming winter, unless fed. Again the Queen taxed her people, and the

cats were saved; but, to the amazement of the Queen and her little

people, the next autumn brought 100,000 hungry cats to be fed, and it

had come to a point where either the people or the cats must starve.

With grief, the Queen decided in favor of the people, for it was evident

that, if the people were allowed to starve to save the cats, the cats

also would starve without the people. That year, 90,000 cats starved to

death on the island.

Thus, the good Queen's well-meant charity, intended to save 10,000 cats

from starving to death, finally resulted in 90,000 cats starving to

death. Actually, her attempt to lessen cat misery multiplied that misery

nine-fold.

Now, what was true of those cats applies with exactly equal truth to the

rearing of paupers and incompetents in times of peace.

* * * * *

In all the countries of the civilized world today, there are

institutions for rearing and educating idiots. Sometimes, a section of

an idiot's skull is cut out, and the skull trepanned in order to give

his little brain room to expand. In this way, an idiot, incapable of

feeding himself, may develop intelligence enough to vote, under the

instruction of the ward-heeler, or he may even develop into a public

expounder of the beauties of defenselessness as a safeguard against war.

The most common of all errors of conviction is the belief that knowledge

of right-doing necessarily leads us to do right. But the truth is, that

we are mainly guided by sentiment, even when it is diametrically opposed

to our knowledge of right. No branch of our learning is more strongly

fortified by facts of experience than that thoroughbred animals cannot

be bred from scrub stock; that superior types of dogs cannot be bred

from mongrels; that a fast trotting-horse is never sired by a Mexican

burro or foaled by a heavy draughtmare.

We know absolutely that identically the same laws govern the breeding

both of human beings and of the lower animals, and that exactly

according to the seed sown will the fruit be. If sentiment leads us to

sow tares among the wheat, we inevitably injure the wheat. No breeder of

the lower animals would, from sentimental considerations, employ

inferior types for his purposes.

With human growth, just as with the growth of vegetation in forest and

field, there is only a certain limited amount of room in the sun, and a

certain limited amount of nourishment and moisture in the soil. When

charity aids an inferior type to secure a plot of earth and a plot of

sky, it can do so only at the expense of some better type, which would

otherwise have conquered the spaces for itself, had not the inferior

specimen had charity as an ally.

Apropos of this philosophy, I quote the following from an article in

_Science_ by G. H. Parker, Professor of Zooelogy, of Harvard:--

* * * * *

"_Thus asylums, retreats, hospitals, and so forth, have been established

by private munificence or public grants. More or less under the

protection of these institutions has grown up a body of semi-dependents

and defectives whose increase it is that excites the apprehension of the

eugenists. That in the past such individuals have always formed a part

of our race cannot be doubted, but that they ever showed a tendency to

increase comparable with what seems to be occurring at present is highly

improbable. The occasion of this increase is not, in my opinion, merely

the exigencies of modern civilization; it is at least in part due to the

immense spread of humanitarian activities which have characterized the

last century of our civilization._"

* * * * *

If Andrew Carnegie were to give $100,000,000 for the support of paupers

in the United States and Great Britain, and another $100,000,000 for the

saving and kindly treatment and support of imbeciles and incompetents,

more continuous harm to the race would result, by securing the survival

of the unfit, than would result from a perpetual war between any two of

the nations now engaged in the great European conflict.

As all charities thrive like a green bay tree in times of peace, and are

neglected in times of war, it will be seen that charity alone in times

of peace is more potent in securing the survival of the unfit than war

could possibly be.

About here, the reader may conclude that I am just as inconsistent in

advocating armaments to preserve peace, which, I hold, tends to foster

degeneracy and decay, as are the pacifists who, by advocating

disarmament, promote war, which, they hold, is most potential in

fostering the same thing.

But this is not so striking an inconsistency as may first appear,

because, as I have shown, nation-wide military training, such as that

practised in Switzerland, would make for regeneracy and efficiency far

more than all our charities, vices, and profligacy make for degeneracy

and decay. No branch of education--not even all the prevalent

preachments on the subjects of hygiene, moral reform, cleanliness,

temperance, and right living--would be so influential for betterment as

would the introduction of the Swiss system of military training.

In order to be a good soldier, a man must be fit, just as a college

athlete must be fit; and military training, like the training of the

college athlete, compels him to observe the hygienic laws of right

living.

We grow upon what we do and what we eat. If we live on an unbalanced

food, which supplies too much of one kind of nourishment and too little

of another, we become unbalanced in body and mind. Similarly, if our

occupation exercises some of our organs and faculties too much and

others not enough, we become unbalanced in body and mind.

The saying is trite that a sound mind requires a sound body. Likewise, a

balanced mind must have a balanced body.

The occupations of civil life, if not constantly accompanied by

systematic, scientific mental and physical training throw us out of

balance. The success of Muldoon's famous human repair-shop depends

entirely upon building up by proper food and strenuous exercise

long-neglected organs and faculties.

The lower branches of a tree, which do not receive the necessary

exercise from the wind, and the necessary vitalizing stimulus of the

sun, gradually atrophy, and wither, die, and drop off; likewise do

unused and unstimulated organs and faculties of the body shrink toward

atrophy and pale toward death. The only part of a tree that is alive is

where the sap runs. All the rest of the tree is dead. Organs and

faculties of the human body not adequately exercised to circulate

through them the required amount of sap, gradually begin to die.

Lord Kitchener is the Muldoon of the new English army. The raw recruits

are trained for their coming fight in much the same manner that a

pugilist is trained. They are made to take the long walk out and the

sharp run home, carrying weights; they wrestle and spar; perform all

manner of calisthenics and gymnastics; are fed proper food, and are made

properly to bathe. To the great majority of them, this man-making

training is a revelation, but they find themselves so improved in health

and so strengthened in body and mind that, when they return to civil

life, they will still utilize much of the useful knowledge of how to get

fit and keep fit; and just as the hard work imposed upon the soldiers is

made easier by their military training, so, when they return to civil

life, they will find all their tasks much easier of accomplishment.

The following is quoted from a letter just received by me from a

prominent English clergyman:

* * * * *

"_The war is making the Britisher a new man, and he is blissfully

unconscious of the conversion in himself. Every class is feeling the

uplift. He will be stronger in his religion, his politics, and his

commerce. Half the men in Kitchener's Army hate fighting and taking

life. They have enlisted for conscience' sake. Naturally they will make

the finest soldiers._"

* * * * *

Soldierly fitness includes not only those sterling qualities of higher

manhood--cleanliness, temperance, efficiency, and moral stamina, raised

from a semi-subconscious latency into conscious action by a military

training--but also it includes that very important attribute--devotion.

A military training develops a vague sense of patriotism whose height is

a hurrah for country, to that height of devotion where one will gladly

die for his country.

In South America, there is a very potential little republic where

military training produces just such beneficial results in a very high

degree. Chili, perhaps, comes nearer to Germany in economic efficiency

than any other country in the world.

Nothing could be more absurd than the fear of the American people that a

good-sized standing army of trained soldiers would menace their liberty.

The very preparation, by education and training, necessary to make a

good soldier, being the very best training in the world to make him a

good citizen, would constitute one of the strongest fortifications

possible to defend us against ourselves. It would act as a gyroscopic

stabilizer for our democratic institutions, and an equilibrator for our

vacillating hot-air ship of state.

One of the very best books that I have yet seen upon the subject of

peace and war is "Peace Insurance," by Richard Stockton, Jr., published

in January, 1915, by A. C. McClurg and Company. It is a book that cannot

fail at this time to do a large amount of good, and I heartily recommend

it to the reader. I quote the following from its pages:

* * * * *

"_To avoid exaggeration we shall quote first Mr. Kirkpatrick, who

attempts to show the horrors of war in his book, 'War--What For?' by

extracts from the New York Independent of March 14, 1907_:

"'_It is the common consensus of opinion among investigators that

industrial casualties in this nation number more than 500,000 yearly.

Dr. Josiah Strong estimates the number at 564,000. As there are 525,600

minutes in a year, it may readily be seen that every minute (day and

night) our industrial system sends to the graveyard or to the hospital a

human being, the victim of some accident inseparable from his toil. We

cry out against the horrors of war.... But the ravages ... of industrial

warfare are far greater than those of armed conflict. The number of

killed or mortally wounded (including deaths from accidents, suicides,

and murders, but excluding deaths from disease) in the Philippine War

from February 4, 1899, to April 30, 1902, was 1,573. These fatal

casualties were spread over a period of three years and three months.

But one coal mine alone in one year furnishes a mortality more than 38

per cent. in excess of this._

"'_The Japanese War is commonly looked upon as the bloodiest of modern

wars. According to the official statement of the Japanese Government,

46,180 Japanese were killed, and 10,970 died of wounds. Our industrial

war shows a greater mortality year by year._

"'_But we are all of us more familiar with the Civil War, and we know

what frightful devastation it caused in households North and South. It

was, however, but a tame conflict compared with that which rages today,

and which we call peace. The slaughter of its greatest battles are

thrown in the shade by the slaughter which particular industries inflict

today. Ask any schoolboy to name three of the bloodiest battles of that

war, and he will probably name Gettysburg, Chancellorsville, and

Chickamauga. The loss on both sides was_:

Killed Wounded

_Gettysburg_ _5,662_ _7,203_

_Chancellorsville_ _3,271_ _18,843_

_Chickamauga_ _3,924_ _23,362_

------ ------

_Total_ _12,857_ _69,408_

"'_But our railroads, state and interstate, and our trolleys in one year

equal this record in the number of killings and double it in the number

of woundings.'_

[Illustration: Casualties of Peace and War Compared]

"_Said Dr. Josiah Strong in the_ North American Review _for November,

1906_:

"'_We might carry on a half-dozen Philippine wars for three-quarters of

a century with no larger number of total casualties than take place

yearly in our peaceful industries._

"'_Taking the lowest of our three estimates of industrial accidents, the

total number of casualties suffered by our industrial army in one year

is equal to the average annual casualties of our Civil War, plus those

of the Philippine War, plus those of the Russian-Japanese War._

"'_Think of carrying on three wars at the same time, world without

end._'

"_Said President Roosevelt in his Annual Message for 1907_:

"'_Industry in the United States now exacts ... a far heavier toll of

death than all of our wars put together.... The number of deaths in

battle in all the foreign wars put together for the last century and a

quarter, aggregate considerably less than one year's death record for

our industries.'..._

"_Glancing over these comparisons between war and peace, we find that

much of the horror of war dwindles away. Comparing those actually killed

in industry and accident with those killed or dying from wounds in

various wars, we find that the annual peace rate is approximately two

and a half times that of the average annual Japanese loss, three times

that of the Union loss in the Civil War, five times the Russian loss in

the Japanese War, six times the Confederate loss in the Civil War,

twenty-eight times the English loss in the Anglo-Boer War, and ninety

times the American loss in the Spanish War. In other words, it would

take the average annual deaths of the English and French in the Crimea,

the Americans in the Mexican War, the North in the Civil War, the

Americans in the Spanish War, the English in the Boer War, and the

Japanese in the Russian War to approach the annual United States peace

rate. Assuming the burden of all these wars, at once, and without

ceasing, would be no more a drain than our peace death rate! Need we say

more as to the cost in lives, as to the sorrowing mother, sweetheart,

and wife? Think of these things. Where now is the bestiality and horror?

Does it belong more to war where comparatively few die for their country

willingly and nobly, or to peace where the multitudes die for sordid

gain--for dollars and cents? Would it not be meet for the pacifists,

assuming that they have the best interest of the country at heart, to

turn first to the horrors of peace, and lastly to the horrors of war?_"

* * * * *

It is well to observe that a very large percentage of the injuries and

deaths in the United States in times of peace, noted by Dr. Strong, are

due to preventable causes, and one of the best remedies is a military

training. In Germany, the number of persons per capita of population

killed and injured by accidents in time of peace is not half as great as

it is in the United States.

These losses are part of the high price that this country pays for

inefficiency. They could be very largely remedied by military training,

which quickens awareness and alertness. Many an accident resulting in

severe wounding or death is due to undeveloped and untrained powers of

mind, and to lack of physical co-ordination. In the works of the

National Cash Register Company, at Dayton, Ohio, where all employees are

given the equivalent of military training in care and efficiency,

personal injury through accidents is almost entirely eliminated.

A man who has been taught to play football and to box and wrestle in his

youth is not nearly so likely in after years to fall and injure himself,

or to be hit by a trolley car, or automobile, as one who has not had

that training. Similarly, a man who, in his youth, has had his mind

developed to quick alertness, and every muscle of his body brought

under the domination of the will by military training, is far less

likely to be injured by accident than one who has not had a military

training. Consequently, many of the ills of peace may be cured by the

practice of the very medicine that is the best remedy for war.

William James, in an article entitled, "The Moral Equivalent of War,"

starts out with the remark, "The war against war is going to be no

holiday excursion or camping party." He adds that, "There is something

highly paradoxical in the modern man's relation to war."

He continues:

* * * * *

"_Ask all our millions north and south whether they would vote now to

have our war for the Union expunged from history, and the record of a

peaceful transition to the present time substituted for that of its

marches and battles, and, probably hardly a handful of eccentrics would

say yes._

"_Yet ask those same people whether they would be willing in cold blood

to stand another civil war now to gain another similar possession, and

not one man or woman would vote for the proposition._"

* * * * *

Let us suppose that the same Southern states that then seceded were to

secede again today, capture all the negroes there and all men and women

whose skins are tinted by negro blood, enslave them, and establish anew

the auction block at the slave market: then let us ask the people of the

North Mr. James's second question.

What defense has the average person against being convinced by such

sophistry, coming from so eminent a psychologist and philosopher as

William James? The conclusion of the average person is: "A great man

like him must know better than I, he having made a study of such

things." This article was given wide circulation by the Association for

International Conciliation. It was also published in _McClure's

Magazine_, and again in the _Popular Science Monthly_.

Others have said, and are saying, similar silly things about the war

against war, but they are not men of such intellectual eminence as was

William James. It is true that Dr. David Starr Jordan is a very

prominent person, and says things even sillier than anything that

William James said, but exactly there is the saving grace of his

sayings. Some of his conclusions are so utterly irrational and absurd as

to enable a very large number of persons to perceive their falsity,

whereas the error is not so easily perceived in such statements as the

foregoing quoted from Mr. James.

Let us examine the proposition to make war on war. The only common-sense

way to wage war on war is to war against the evils that produce war. To

wage war on war, which comes like the visitation of a physician, to cure

ills, would be like waging war on the medical profession to cure a

decimating pestilence. To arrest the hand of the surgeon in order to

save bloodshed is to let the patient die of cancer.

Our Civil War was merely a great surgical operation which removed a

malignant cancer from the breast of Columbia. Mars, the old and

experienced surgeon, made a good job of it. Columbia's ailment was one

that could not be cured by physic, poultice, incantations, or other

quack nostrums, which, Mr. James suggested, might have been tried. The

patient had to be operated on with the sword, so that the question as to

the right or wrong of the Civil War, and as to whether it should have

then been fought, and whether, if it had been delayed till now, it

should now be fought, depends upon a choice of evils--depends entirely

upon whether or not American slavery was a greater evil than the

American Civil War.

Two of my brothers were killed in the awful struggle to free the slaves

and save the Union. It was worth the price to them, to me, and to the

rest of my family; and I am of the opinion that every other family in

the country who made a like sacrifice would agree with me that to free

four millions of human beings from bondage was worth the price.

Emancipation then not only freed four millions, but it saved, between

that time and now, more than twenty millions from the yoke and the lash.

But, what is still more important, the emancipation of the slaves

emancipated their masters also--emancipated all of us, North and

South--and raised the proclamation of human equality by our country's

fathers from a mockery and a shame to a reality.

If there were men and women and children bought and sold in this country

today, you and I, reader, would mix up in the infamous business with gun

and sword, and we would not wait long to do much voting about it,

either. "Great national problems," said Bismarck, "are solved not by

speeches and resolutions of majorities, but by blood and iron."

It is very evident that it would have been wrong in 1860 for some

powerful external force, waging war against war, to have prevented the

Civil War, and thereby have prevented the emancipation of the slaves.

It is all very well at this time to prate about the possibility of a

peaceful settlement of the differences between the North and South

before the Civil War broke out. That is exactly what was tried. Even

after the war broke out, Lincoln, one of the greatest men that America

ever produced, tried with all his might to do that very thing. War was

the only way.

A very large percentage of the wars of the world have been waged for

freedom--have been wars for justice, and against tyranny. To war against

such wars would be to war for tyranny, and against freedom and justice.

Actually, those who today are recruiting for the war against war are

asking you to enlist in a campaign to shackle the hands of the oppressed

in future years, and tie them down with ball and chain to prevent them

from striking for liberty. They are to be denied the right of war for

freedom, which was our right in the Revolution.

Every man exerts a positive influence either for good or for evil. If

the advocates of disarmament and non-resistance are exerting a good

influence, then I am exerting a bad influence, and every advocate of

armed defense is a worker of evil. You, reader, must judge between us.

If it is wrong to insure with armaments against invasion of this

country, which invasion would mean the violation of our homes, the rape

of our wives and daughters and sisters and sweethearts; if it is right

to invite invasion by non-resistance, and wrong to oppose it with force;

if, when an enemy injures us, it is the correct thing to let him add

insult to the first offense; then it is wrong to be a man, it is wrong

to resent dishonor of the home, and all of us who have any manhood in us

should be emasculated.

If, when this country is invaded, some militant scoundrel, forcing his

way into your home, should lay the hand of violent lust on trembling

wife or daughter, would you observe the pacifist policy of

non-resistance, or would you kill him right there, even if it cost you

your life? I know your answer. The invading army would be lessened by

one soldier, or there would be one less American.

CONCLUSION

WHAT SHALL THE END BE?

Is it possible to prescribe a remedy for war? We know that law,

unsupported by force, cannot be substituted for war. We know that war

will obey no law other than that of necessity, and, consequently, that

the settling of national differences at an international court of

conciliatory arbitration is not workable. We know that no nation will

abide by the dictates of any such court when those dictates are opposed

to its interests, unless that court has the power to enforce its

decrees.

We know, then, that an international court of arbitration can dispense

only such justice as may be consistent with the interests and

necessities of the nations possessing the power to dominate that court;

therefore, we know that the greatest measure of justice and the greatest

security for peace that may be expected are only what may be pledged by

the union of a majority of the great nations in a pool of their national

interests and necessities, to maintain such international order as shall

be consistent with the terms of the pool. All other nations outside of

the pool will then be compelled to observe the law of the pooling

nations, because the necessity of keeping peace with these dominant

Powers will be greater than any other necessity.

The justice that the weaker nations may expect will depend upon the

degree in which their individual interests are the mutual concern of the

larger interests.

Armies and navies will then become veritable international police

forces, and the necessity for large competitive armaments will be very

greatly lessened.

There will then be greater security for peace, although this striving

world is not likely soon to be a safe and quiet nesting place for the

dove of peace; because at any time, when the necessities of the pooling

nations shall put too great a strain on the compact, then the pool will

break and war ensue. The great aim of the peoples of the nations should

not be for a Utopian peace based on merely sentimental grounds, but for

a peace secured by so practicable an _entente_ and pact between the

great Powers as shall, entirely aside from sentiment, work for the best

welfare of the world.

Russian, Teuton, Frenchman, Anglo-Saxon, when you shall have returned

your blood-wet swords to their scabbards, then join hands over-seas with

us Americans, who are kin to all the blood you have spilled, and let us

take serious counsel of one another.

But, Americans, though we may turn our face toward the morning that

should come, such posturing cannot, any more than the cock's-crow, bring

the morning; and until the great international compact be made, we shall

be able to find safety only by adequate preparation to stand alone

against the dread eventuality of war.

INDEX

Abbott, Dr. Lyman, opinions of war, 52-53.

Aerial bomb: few advantages, many disadvantages of, 205-11.

Aerial Warfare, Chapter VIII, 203.

Aeronautical Society, first annual banquet of, 16.

Aeroplane, served to stimulate development of balloon, 204;

imperfections of first, 204;

advantages over Zeppelin, 214;

less expensive than Zeppelin, 214;

French and German, ordered by U. S., 216-17;

foreign countries possessing, 218-19;

indispensable for location of masked batteries, 219.

Air-craft, chief use of, 213;

the eyes of both army and navy, 219;

a necessity in present-day warfare, 219-20;

lack of, in America, 220-21.

_Alabama_, the, 193.

Alexander the Great, 90.

Alva, Duke of, undertook to kill entire population of Netherlands, 239.

American and British manufacturing works, 76.

Arbitration, international, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42, 46, 306.

Armaments, a safeguard against war, 6, 7, 8, 9.

a small burden in proportion to burden of luxuries, 226;

benefits of, 228;

added employment of labor in construction of, decreases individual

taxation, 231.

Armor-plate, introduction of, 181;

increase in thickness of, 184;

inferior to the gun, 184;

sufficiency of, dependent upon insufficiency of gun to which it is

opposed, 186;

improvements in, 189.

Army, our, strength of, in numbers, 100, 117, 118;

lack of artillery and training in, 102;

ignorance of people as to proper equipment of, 103, 115;

lack of system in, 120;

shortage of officers of, 122, 123;

personnel of our regular, 126;

total enlisted strength of, 126, 127;

mobile strength of, 127;

injustice done officers of, 146;

a standing, one of the strongest fortifications, 294.

Attila, 79.

Automatic magazine-rifle, its effectiveness over old methods of

warfare, 86, 87.

Balaklava, the noble Six Hundred at, 102.

Balloon, developed with aeroplane, 204;

modern, 205;

dirigible, has one advantage over aeroplane, 210.

Battle-cruiser, modern, absence of any in U. S., 188;

adopted by foreign countries, 188.

Beatty, Admiral, reports on North Sea fight, 195.

Belgian women, abject condition of, 244, 245.

Bernhardi, extracts from his "How Germany Makes War," 89.

Bessemer steel process introduced by Carnegie, 252.

Bethlehem Steel Company, manufacture of guns and armor-plate, 9, 10,

76.

Billings, Josh, on ignorance, 23.

Bismarck, 163.

Blatchford, Robert, writer for _The Daily Mail_, quoted, 164-67;

mentioned, 167.

Bliss, E. W., Torpedo Works, 77.

Bloch, M. de, author of "The Future of War," against possibility of

war, 2;

discussed, 93, 95.

_Bluecher_, the, 187.

Bombshells, 185;

dropped from airship not very effective, 209.

"Britannia Rules the Waves," 97.

Buckner, Colonel E. G., vice-president of du Pont Powder Company, 257.

Buffington, General A. R., 200, 201.

Caesar, massacres by, 40;

mentioned, 90, 162.

Can Law Be Substituted for War? Chapter II, 22.

Canal, Panama, 157, 173.

Canning, George, attempts to join England in her open-door policy, 58.

Cannon designed by Mr. Maxim to illustrate advantages of projectiles

of great size, 198;

description of, 198, 199.

Carlyle, quotations from, 49.

Carnegie, Andrew, 68, 290;

his ideas on military defenselessness, 69;

quotation from, 70-71;

his views discussed, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78, 80;

greatest American armorer, 252.

Chaffee, Lieut.-Gen. Adna R., quotation from, 68.

Charity, evils of, 283, 284, 285, 289;

J. Ellis Barker on, 286;

cat story illustrating evils of mistaken, 286-88;

thrives in time of peace, forgotten in times of war, 291.

Chittenden, Hiram M., his arraignment of war, 267-68.

_Christian Herald, The_, 46.

Colt Patent Firearms, 76.

Congress, dependent upon will of people, 132-33;

has power to dominate Army and Navy, 141;

not qualified to pass judgment on Army and Navy, 144;

neglects to take necessary precautions against war,145;

decides strength of Navy,164;

and the General Board, 168.

Conscription, values of, 136;

enforced in Germany, 136.

Cradock and von Spee, naval battle between, 195.

Cramb, Professor J. A., quotation from, 41.

Cramp Shipbuilding Works, 77.

Cromwell, 90, 163.

Crozier, General William, statement of, 121-22.

Cyrus the Great, 280.

Dangerous Criminal Class, A? Chapter XI, 247.

Dangerous Preachments, Chapter I, 1.

De Bange obturator, an American invention, 217.

Dirigibles, foreign countries possessing, 218-19.

Disarmament, repeatedly a failure, 12, 13.

Diseases, germs of, sown by old pioneers, 278.

Dreadnought, evolved by England, 158;

superiority of, recognized by Germany, France, Japan, 158;

not appreciated by American Congress, 158;

cost of, 225.

Du Pont Company, The, 9, 10, 77.

Du Pont, Francis G., eliminated danger in manufacture of

gun-cotton, 257, 258.

Economic Club of Boston, 18.

Ego-Fanatic Good Intentions and Their Relation to National Defense,

Chapter X, 235.

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, his opinion about war, 271-72.

Emery, Professor C., quotation from his "Some Economic Aspects of

War," 226.

European War, predicted, 13, 14, 15, 16.

Falkland Islands, running fight off, 195.

Fiske, Admiral, quoted, 170.

Formative strife, man as a master, 27, 28, 29.

Franklin, Benjamin, 135-36.

Frederick the Great, 79, 90.

French batteries outrange German, 103.

French Government, maker of its own gunpowder, 262.

Fuel-ships, 170, 171.

"Future of War, The," by M. de Bloch, an argument against

possibility of war, 2.

Gardner, Congressman, 128, 161, 169, 216.

Garrison, Secretary of War, interviewed, 100, 101.

Gathmann gun, 208.

General Board of Navy, organized, 160;

headed by General Dewey, 160, 163, 164.

and Congress, 168;

report of, 169.

Germany, government of, 135;

militarism of, 139;

progress in industrial arts and sciences, 139;

superiority of, intellectually, 140;

fight of, with England at North Sea, 195;

standing army of, 225.

Goethals, Colonel, character of, 253-54.

Good and Evil of Peace and of War, The, Chapter XII, 265.

Grant, 90.

Great Powers, 101, 108.

Gun, increase in size and strength, 184;

dependence of, upon armored protection, 187;

high-power naval, most powerful dynamic instrument, 189.

Gunpowder, smokeless, invention and development of, 181;

four times as powerful as black powder, 182.

Guns, field, necessity for, 103, 104;

helplessness of infantry without, 107;

superiority over armor-plate, 196.

Haeckel, Ernst, 22.

Hague Congresses, 35.

Haldane, Lord, 128, 164.

Hannibal, 90, 162.

Hannibal's Balearic slingers, 85.

Hanno, 162.

Herodotus, quoted, 281.

Herr Krupp, 252.

Holland submarine boats, 77.

Holy Alliance, formed 1815, 56;

purpose of, 56, 57;

actions of, 57.

Howitzers, German use of, 103;

governmental need of, 201-2;

Germans reported makers of huge, 199.

Huns and Vandals of present day, 31.

_Indiana_, the, 156.

Indulgence, statistics of U. S., 225-26.

International Tribunal, 39.

Inventions:

gun-cotton, 257;

multi-perforated grain, 257, 258;

process for successful reworking of smokeless powder, 259;

army rifle, 259;

smokeless rifle-powder, 259;

value to government, 259-60.

breech-loading guns, steam turbine, submarine torpedo boat,

etc., 261.

Isolation, fatal, of U. S., 120.

James, William, attitude toward war, 300;

discussed, 301.

Japan, strength increasing, 100.

Japanese, a far-seeing people, 62, 63;

possessors of two powerful

battle-cruisers, 188.

Jefferson, Charles Edward, advocates peace, 19, 20, 247.

_Jena_, battleship, 263.

Jordan Dr. David Starr, believes in disarmament, 7;

says war materials should be made by government, 7, 9;

opposes war, 11;

quotations from his "War and Waste," 1, 17, 18, 247;

discussed, 93, 95, 240, 301;

paid from Carnegie Peace Foundation, 252.

_Journal of the Royal United Service Institution_, drawings of Mr.

Maxim published in, 199.

Kaiser Wilhelm II, quoted, 141.

Kane, Admiral, quoted, 116.

_Kearsarge_, the, 193.

Kitchener, Lord, Muldoon of new English army, 293.

Knight, Admiral Austin M., quoted, 150-54, 155, 171, 173-74.

Lake Submarine Torpedo Boat Works, 77.

_La Liberte_, battleship, 263.

Language of the Big Guns, Chapter VII, 181.

Law, substitution of, for War, 31-32;

inadequacy of, 34;

must be backed by force, 36.

Lea, General Homer, quotations from, 33, 63, 64, 68, 228-29.

Lee, 90.

Lincoln, Abraham, 163.

Lowell, James Russell, quotation from his poem, 44, 45.

Machinery, modern, labor-saving, 81, 82, 83;

a strong factor in a nation's preparedness for war, 87;

expense of, 87, 96;

a means of shortening length of war, 88;

assists the soldier in battle, 90;

saves human life, 92.

Mahan, Admiral, 46;

quoted, 67.

Manufactories of munitions of war, unprotected, 77, 78.

Marat, a pacific moralist, 238.

Marius, military genius of, 162.

Marlborough, 90.

Marlin Firearms Works, 76.

"Marseillaise," 97.

Martel, Charles, 90, 162.

_Massachusetts_, the, 156.

Maxim, Hudson, his proposition of throwing large charges of explosives

from big guns criticised, 200;

inventor of multi-perforated grain, 257, 258.

Maximite, first trial of, 201;

first explosive successfully fired through armor-plate, 201.

Medici, Catherine de', 238.

Mendeleeff, told how to colloid gun-cotton, 257.

_Merrimac_, the, 181, 184, 185, 192, 193.

Meyer, G. von L., ex-Secretary of Navy, 135, 143, 175;

quoted, 176-80.

Militia, lack of batteries in, 119;

lack of officers in, 120;

actual strength of, 127.

Modern Methods and Machinery of War, Chapter IV, 68.

_Monitor_, Ericsson's, 158, 181, 192, 193;

victory over _Merrimac_, 184, 185;

inferior to modern battleships, 193;

developed into super-dreadnought by Europeans, 217;

builders of, inspired by spirit of patriotism, 255;

tardy acceptance of, by government, 256.

Monroe Doctrine, proclaimed, 56;

actual formulator of, John Quincy Adams, 58;

inconsistencies of, 60, 62;

General Lea on, 63-4;

England's attitude toward, 65;

an Anglo-American compact, 66.

Monroe, President, declaration of, 58-9.

Montesquieu, quoted, 281.

Mukden, battle of, 249.

Mueller, Max, 41.

Multi-perforated grain, invented by Mr. Maxim, 198.

Murray Hill Hotel, explosion in front of, 209-10.

Napoleon, 40, 45, 57, 79, 89, 118, 162, 163;

his "_Que messieurs les assassins commencent_," 54.

Navy, U. S., Admiral Knight on the, 150-54;

necessity for superiority in, 155;

gradually slipping back, 158;

inadequate, 99, 100;

constituents for a proper, 170, 171.

waste of money appropriated for, 175.

Needs of Our Army, The, Chapter V, 113.

Needs of Our Navy, The, Chapter VI, 141.

New York Arsenal, 77.

New York _Times_, quoted, 144-45.

O'Neil, Admiral Charles, 200.

_Oregon_, the, 156.

Our Armaments Not a Burden, Chapter IX, 222.

Our Inconsistent Monroe Doctrine, Chapter III, 56.

Parker, Professor G. H., quoted, 290.

Patent Office, inventions received by, increasing, 260.

Peace, conference, 18;

praters, advocates, and prophets of, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 108, 247;

falseness of position of pacifiers toward, 109, 110, 235, 236,

237, 241, 242, 248, 249, 250, 253, 256, 257, 266;

Bible and, 49, 50;

sophists, 109, 262, 267, 274, 275;

tends more to degeneracy and national decay than war, 280.

Peter the Great, architect of Russia, 163.

Picatinny Arsenal, 76.

Plato, on war, 265.

Pratt and Whitney Works, 76.

Projectiles, power and weight of, 183;

improvements in, 188-89;

distance most efficient protection from, 192;

larger ones lose less velocity than smaller, 195-96.

_Queen Elizabeth_, the, latest and most powerful type of dreadnought,

175.

Remington Small Arms Works, 76.

Report of the Chief of Ordnance, 1914, 125.

Report of the Chief of Staff, 128.

Roberts, Lord, 128, 129.

Robespierre, a noted pacifist, 238.

Roosevelt, Theodore, quotations from, 3, 5, 43;

caliber of, 143.

Royal United Service Institution of Great Britain, 197.

Ruskin, John, on war, 269-71.

Russia, Czar of, 96.

Russian "Monroe Doctrine," 57.

Russo-Japanese War, predicted, 13.

Salisbury, Lord, quoted, 235.

Santiago, battle of, 195.

Savage Arms Works, 76.

_Scientific American_, quoted, 121; 124-25;

mentioned, 159.

Scriptures, quotations from, 49, 50, 51, 52.

Secretary of Army and Secretary of Navy, 141, 142;

should not be treated politically, 142.

Secretary of War, 141.

Sheridan, 90.

Sherman, his famous declaration about war, 244.

Smith and Wesson Revolver Works, 76.

Smokeless cannon-powder, invented by Mr. Maxim, 197-98.

Smokeless multi-perforated powder, adopted by U. S. Government, 218.

Socialists take part in war, 97.

South American republics and the United States, 60, 61.

Sparta, ancient, power of government in, 136.

Speed, of supreme importance in naval engagements, 196-97.

Spencer, Herbert, philosopher, 19, 23, 30, 229, 245.

Spottsylvania Court House, battle of, 146.

Stead, William T., recommends that British Parliament build two

battleships to every one built by Germany, 18.

Steel Trust, 10.

Stockton, Mr. Richard, Jr., quoted, 139, 227;

his book on "Peace Insurance," quotations from, 295-99.

Strong, Dr., President of American Institute of Social Service, 54,

299.

Sullivan, John L., fighter, 19, 172.

Sumner, William Graham, quotation from, 56.

Swiss system of military training, 134, 137, 138, 291.

Talmage, Rev. T. de Witt, 47.

Tennyson, 31.

Torquemada, 238.

Tupper, Sir Charles, 65.

Twain, Mark, 24.

Union Metallic Cartridge Works, 76.

United States Army, powder works of, 76.

United States Arsenal, 76.

United States Naval Torpedo Station, 77.

United States Steel Corporation, 9.

United States, a world-power, 149, 157.

Upton, General Emory, prophetic speech of, 116.

_Vesuvius_, the, 209.

Victory, naval, dependent upon weight of broadsides, 104;

land, upon weight of gun-fire, 104.

Vieille, producer of gun-cotton, 257.

"Wacht am Rhein," 97.

War, ex-President Taft's views on, 16;

China's, 16;

Italian, with Tripoli, 16;

Balkan, 16;

Mexican, 17;

European, 17, 103, 232, 233;

Dr. Jordan's views on, 17-18;

when justifiable, 42, 43, 45;

and Christianity, 46-55;

Civil, 85, 86, 87, 90, 302, 305;

Boer, 103;

Spanish, 158, 221;

as an art, 172;

of 1812, 221;

advantages of, 270, 271, 272, 273;

survival of fittest in, 274;

mixer of races, 274;

remedy for? 306-308.

War materials, manufacture of, by government and private

individuals, 9, 10, 251, 252;

manufacturers of, actuated by honorable principles, 255.

Washington, George, opinion of war, 84, 85.

Winchester Repeating Arms and Cartridge Works, 76.

Woman's Peace Party, resolutions of, 239-40;

mistaken ideas of, 241, 242;

bravery of, if war should come, 242, 243, 244;

inconsistency of, 244.

Wood, General Leonard, 118, 134.

letter from, 113-15;

quotation from, 129, 130, 131, 132.

Wright Brothers, encouraged abroad, 216;

Wright Brothers, mentioned, 219.

Wyndeer, Sir William, 235.

Zalinski pneumatic gun, 200.

Zeppelin, subject of guess-work, 204;

speed of, 205;

little accuracy in bomb-dropping from, 211;

an enormous target, 211;

more expensive than aeroplane, 213;

use as troop-ship yet to be proven, 214;

advantages over aeroplane, 215;

important use in detection of submarines, 215;

not one in U. S., 218.

PRAISE FROM PATRIOTS

Extracts From a Few of Hundreds of Letters Praising HUDSON MAXIM'S

DEFENSELESS AMERICA

THEODORE ROOSEVELT:

"'Defenseless America' is a capital book. I hope it will have

the widest possible circulation throughout our country. The

prime duty for this nation is to prepare itself so that it can

protect itself; and this is the duty that you are preaching in

your admirable volume."

OSCAR S. STRAUS:

"'Defenseless America', coming from an expert, will awaken

interest in the most practical method of securing peace by

safeguarding our national existence. I am in fullest accord

with your Conclusion--an international compact with adequate

international force to maintain it, and give adequate guarantee

to enforce its decrees."

S. S. MCCLURE:

"A most convincing book on an extraordinarily important

subject, done in a manner not only convincing but irrefutable."

REAR-ADMIRAL CHARLES D. SIGSBEE:

"I should not have said that the subject could be treated in a

way to make it fascinating to the popular reader, yet I now

think that is precisely what you have done. May the book bear

good fruit!"

GARRETT P. SERVISS:

"'Defenseless America' ought to go into the hands of ten

million American citizens before another month passes. You have

done a magnificent thing for your country! In God's name, may

she turn from the silly twaddle of the pacifist wiseacres, and

save herself, even on the crumbling verge!"

GEORGE VON LENGERKE MEYER:

"It will go a great ways toward aiding the people of this

country to realize the necessity of a proper national defense

and a preparedness against war."

MRS. JOHN A. LOGAN:

"I wish that every official in the land could read it."

DR. ORISON SWETT MARDEN:

"A colossal, monumental treatment of the subject."

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT:

"You have brought the whole question of National Defense to a

basis which can be readily understood by the average layman."

LIEUT. BARON HROLF VON DEWITZ:

"In 'Defenseless America' you explode a crater of information

on the subject such as has never been detonated before."

COL. BEVERLEY W. DUNN:

"I wish to congratulate you on the conspicuous and valuable

service that you have rendered the people of the United States

in writing this book."

DR. E. C. BECK:

"I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for this

masterpiece of revelation on your part, this opus which I look

upon in the nature of an historical event. May the Lord use

your book to pound a little sense into our fellow citizens."

REV. J. F. STILLEMANS:

"I am only one of thousands who would welcome an edition as

cheap as possible of 'Defenseless America' so that we could

distribute it freely."

CLEVELAND MOFFETT:

"'Defenseless America' is great stuff and ought to be read by

every loyal American."

W. SIDNEY JOPSON:

"The direct results of reading 'Defenseless America' were that

I went to Plattsburg and applied for admission in our National

Guard."

PRAISE FROM EDITORS

No Serious Book Has Ever Been More Highly Praised by the Leading

Newspapers of America.

PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC LEDGER:

"A book by an expert in modern armament who writes with graphic

power what he knows better than anyone in this country--a

solemn warning."

NEW YORK AMERICAN:

"No book issued on the subject marshals with equal skill so

great an array of facts as Mr. Maxim's volume. In the present

state of national thought upon our military and naval needs

this book is most valuable."

WASHINGTON STAR:

"In origin and treatment this is a surpassing study whose sheer

information, apart from its personal conclusions, is worth the

serious attention, not only of the legislator, but of the plain

man behind the lawmaker."

DETROIT FREE PRESS:

"Hudson Maxim makes a call to arms against war. Here is an

argument for proper armament from a man who not only foretold

the Japanese war and named the victor, but also prophesied the

present conflict and by knowledge and study of world's

conditions knows what he is talking about and makes his warning

timely."

LOS ANGELES TIMES:

"A powerful book on an imminent and national problem that every

thinking citizen should read with care."

BOSTON TRANSCRIPT:

"Shows how it is safer for a country like the United States

with so large a territory to defend, to prepare, so that no

foreign nation will be anxious to try a struggle with us. The

peace of the United States will then rest on a firm

foundation."

BALTIMORE SUN:

"The book is brilliantly written, with the severity of one who

intensely desires to drive a truth home and with the assurance

of one who feels his statistics unassailable and his arguments

unanswerable. He is supported by many witnesses whose knowledge

must be respected. There is no smallness in the writer's

attitude. He appears to feel intensely his mission as prophet

and patriot."

CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER:

"Here is a man, frankly interested in war, who seems utterly

honest in his beliefs. The book contains an expert elucidation

of the weaknesses of the American army and navy. It has

practical suggestions for improvement. It is, in fact, a

complete text book for the student of American preparedness or

unpreparedness, written, of course, in a sincerely ex parte

manner."

BROOKLYN CITIZEN:

"The book should be read and studied carefully by every lover

of his country."

LEWISTON JOURNAL:

"'Defenseless America' is a ringing and insistent call,

calculated to startle the average American out of his peaceful

and complacent sense of security."

NEW YORK PRESS:

"The book is interesting--as interesting as a well-written and

absorbing novel, only it deals with vital facts that have a

bearing on the lives and fortunes of every one in this

country."

THE OUTLOOK:

"We wish that we could think that those who are opposed to any

preparation against war by this country would read and consider

this book of Mr. Hudson Maxim."

LIFE, N. Y.:

"One of the early lumber-camp tales ended with a stirring scene

in which a big, sandy-haired hero, caught in the path of a

bursting log jam, hurls his cap defiantly into the advancing

wall of destruction, just before it whelms him. Such a gesture,

futile yet magnificent, is suggested by Hudson Maxim's fiery

appeal to the sleeping intelligence and lulled self-interest of

his countrymen, 'Defenseless America.' The book contains a

remorseless marshaling of stern facts, fused into prophecy by a

sort of incandescent logic. It is the first bold proclaiming of

the bitter 'civilization' truths revealed by the vast

disillusionment of the war. And these are here flung, as the

author feels, into the face of approaching national disaster."

THE SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN:

"The scope of 'Defenseless America' is so all-embracing, that the

author has given a veritable mine of information upon the subject

of war and war material. Mr. Maxim is well qualified by his long

and successful association, as a practical and successful inventor,

with the production of the implements of war, to write upon the

technical side of the question; and this he does with a

characteristic force and lucidity which will render the subject

perfectly understandable and full of fascinating interest for the

average layman."

REVIEW OF REVIEWS:

"A graphic and effective presentation of facts revealing the

defenseless condition of this country and indicating what must be

done to avert national humiliation."

"THIS POWERFUL BOOK HAS JARRED

AMERICAN COMPLACENCY AS NO

OTHER BOOK HAS

EVER DONE"

From The New York American

One of the most remarkable men of our time has written a book--and the

book is probably the most startling document ever placed before the

American people. Its author is Hudson Maxim, world-famous inventor,

writer on many topics of public interest, member of the Naval Advisory

Board--and an American patriot.

His book, called "Defenseless America," has fallen among the complacent,

the self-satisfied, the careless and the indifferent like a

seventeen-inch shell.

It is a pitiless book--pitiless in its facts, pitiless in its logic,

pitiless in its conclusions.

Mr. Maxim knows what he is writing about; he is one of the greatest

authorities on military affairs in the world. His book has the cold

steel precision of truth.

He shows that all wars have economic causes, no matter how they are

painted over with sentiment. And he demonstrates that one of the most

urgent economic incentives to war that has ever existed will be the

relative condition of Europe and the United States at the close of the

Great War.

Imagine the victors of this gigantic conflict--Allies or

Teutons--impoverished in money and resources, with the most colossal

public debt in the world's history hanging over them, but possessing an

enormous army of trained veterans and a world-beating navy.

Then, on this side of the Atlantic, a nation that thinks it "can whip

all creation," and acts on that principle--a hundred million over-fed,

money-making people, nine-tenths of whom could not load a modern

infantry rifle if they should ever happen to see one; a country of

countless dollars protected by obsolete battleships and submarines that

can neither float nor sink; a nation rich but undefended, confident but

weak, dictatorial in manner but powerless in action.

America sits on an open powder barrel. Will the Victors of the Great War

apply the match?

Get this stirring and tremendous book, and read what will happen--in Mr.

Maxim's own words. He will tell you where the match will be applied,

what points in controversy will bring on the collision--and then what

will take place with startling swiftness.

And--

He tells what may be done, even at this late day, for effective defense.

* * * * *

As Mr. Maxim has cut out all royalty, publishers are thereby enabled to

furnish a special edition of the book, of which this volume is a sample,

at only fifty cents a copy.

The book may be obtained of or ordered through any bookstore, or the

publishers, Hearst's International Library Company, 119 West 40th

Street, New York, will send it postage-paid to any address for sixty

cents, or ten copies in a single package for five dollars--fifty cents a

copy. The library edition, superior paper and binding, may still be had

at two dollars a copy.