SOMES AND BILLETS DOUX.

Evening Star, Issue 19994, 11 October 1928, Page 6

SOMES AND BILLETS DOUX.

The American Government has given a new sign of its faith in the Kellogg Pact and of its zeal tor the limitation of armaments. It has placed an order for two dirigibles, which will be the biggest in the world, each carrying fifty tons of explosives and modern war gas. There is nothing whatever exceptional in this contrast between precept and practice. In this particular connection the same contradiction is being shown by most of the countries of the world, ft comes with a special richness, however, from America, which pressed the Kellogg Pact as its own contribution to idealism, and has less cause to fear attack than possibly any other country on the face of the globe. Mr Arthur Brisbane, in the Hearst Press, has applauded the act, and, as the Hearst Press on such subjects speaks most naturally with one voice—the voice of its proprietor—it is probable that all the newspapers which it

combines have applauded it. To quote Mr Brisbane; “We make war on no nation, but wo should bo ready and able to fill with subsequent regret anyone attacking us. They would bo able to unleash ono hundred fast, destructive planes, which would leave, with Uncle Sam’s compliments, a visiting card in Europe or Asia that would not soon be forgotten. ’ Defence, not defiance, is the motto. That can bo conceded. And it is an old principle ol defence which puts its first faith in attack. But why should defence make such a preoccupation o) tho mind to a Power in America's position? Two great new airships are being built in Great Britain, but they will be purely lor commerce, it is not conceived that they shall carry " visiting cards ” to spread death and destruction among tho citizens probably the nonbelligerent citizens, since it is not possible, from a height ol several thousand lect, to make nice distinctions —ol a nation by which Britain might be attacked. And when the possibilities ol an air bombardment with “ modern war gas” are considered, this llippanl manner ot speaking ol it becomes repulsive. Tile subject is not ono with which it is decent to jest. For a less ottcncc than Mr Brisbane’s, since he dul not attempt to he jocular, Mr Hoover, the Republican candidate lor the American Presidency, incurred a reproof recently which no small proportion ol his countrymen must have toil to he deserved. Dr iNitTiulas Murray Butler, president ol Columbia University, is a loading Republican who has always differed Iron) Ins parly in his hostility to the Prohibition law Aftei Mi Hoover’s speech was made, accepting nomination for the Presidency, lie found anothoi reason to dit for from its candidate. Mr Hoover, he said, “dismisses with a lew perfunctory words the truly remarkable treaty just now to he signed by ourselves and all tho great Powers ot the earth, pledging renunciation of wains an instrument of national policy, and chooses this moment to repeat that ‘ we must and shall maintain our naval defence in a strength and efficiency that will yield us at all times primary assurance ot liberty.' ” Then, quoting Mr Hoover’s declaration that the United States must not only be just but respected, Dr Butler declared that when tho candidate used tho word “respected” his meaning would be more accurately rendered by “feared,” and he asked: “What sort ot mind and nature is it which can at this stage of the world’s history deliberately find a basis in force rather than justice? is not tiie just man, tho just nation, respected; arc not Holland, Belgium, Switzerland, and Denmark respected? Surely tho repetition of this ancient discarded doctrine will not be accepted by the masses of the Republican Party or people.” Referring to tho last naval programme, which was thrown out by Congress, he wont on to say. “That amazing proposal was m.*do in the interest ol national security, meaning thereby swagger, and it rested precisely upon the principle which Mr Hoover now enunciates and accepts. A whole host of Republicans dissent absolutely on this point, and will make their dissent manifest by every means in thenpower. When the American people pledge the renunciation of war they mean what they say, and take it fur granted that our fellow nations mean what they say. Wo shall not support any policy which would at once enter upon a now and enlarged plan of naval construction under the guise of defending ourselves against some Power which had only just taken s formal pledge not to attack us. The contradiction and hypocrisy of it ail would be comic were they not so unspeakably tragic.” Such plain speaking prompted surmises that Dr Butler would be found yet crossing over to tho Democratic side, as Mr Raskob, “Al ’ Smith’s right-hand man, Ims crossed from tho Republicans, but that has not happened yet.