(We invite all men in the University to submit communications on subjects of timely interest, but assume no responsibility for sentiments expressed under this head.)

To the editors of the CRIMSON:

Seldom has it been our fortune to come across a more lucid exposition of the true militarist position than that presented yesterday by Mr. Schenck. His conception of the pacifist position is that "the continued prevalence of rain is due to the pernicious custom of carrying umbrellas." While gloriously and completely missing the fundamental premise of the anti-militarist doctrine, Mr. Schenck has in one simile clearly exposed the basic fallacy of militarism. To the militarist war is an evitable as rain; it being futile to try to prevent rain, we can only resign ourselves to protection against it. To the anti-militarist exactly the opposite is the true situation. War between nations is no more an inevitable phenomenon of nature than physical conflicts between individuals, and no less subject to control by law and reason.

Does Mr. Schenck suggest that because Great Britain has applied the "two-power" rule, only to her absolute control of the sea that therefore she has been inadequately armed? Yet the German army from the point of view of her military authorities was no more than "adequate"; was she saved from the present war?

In military strength per head of population Belgium has long been one of the most prepared of all nations.

As for finding analogies between the situation of China and that of the United States; would it be too much to expect that Mr. Schenck might also be able to draw some valuable deductions from the subjection of the not un-military American Indians?

Lastly, as to the allusions concerning "the more notorious international highwaymen." We feel that Mr. Schenck has some particular nation or nations in mind; he could not be referring to all the European nations? As for ourselves, we find it quite impossible to fit any of the countries involved satisfactorily into the part of highwaymen or victim. To each country it was represented through the medium of secret diplomacy that the nation "was cornered"; in each country the advice of the military authorities to strike hard and strike first was followed. Anyone who has heard the story of refugees from the war districts will not care to discuss the result. Can Mr. Schenck consistently make the suggestion that to the nation which most explicitly followed the advice of its military men most blame is due?

We regret that so clever a letter could not have been written in a better cause.  LEWIS S. GANNETT 2G.  CECIL H. SMITH '15  ARTHUR FISHER '15.