If we as a nation adopt militarism, said Mr. Angell in effect last night, we must be prepared to abdicate our individual political conscience. The rule, "my country, right or wrong," will govern the lives of Americans. Undoubtedly in case of war the citizen would have to carry out the policy of his government, but it must not be forgotten that in this country the policy of the government is the policy of the people, and not the product of a bureaucratic autocracy. The subjection of the individual to a higher will, when that will is the determination of a community of which this individual forms a part, is an excellent discipline, and will have a salutary effect upon the community as well as the individuals of which it is composed. The sense of collective responsibility developed would be generous return for the partial loss of freedom.

Preparedness by half-measures, Mr. Angell maintained, is more dangerous than total unpreparedness. To establish a great military and naval force without formulating a distinct foreign policy is a half-measure. The danger for this country is not that we shall have a force without an object. We have a very definite foreign policy, a policy which perhaps we have yet to show contains no menace towards other nations, but we are pitiably lacking in power to enforce it.

Undoubtedly, if we are to become a great military and naval power, it is necessary that we state definitely our intention of maintaining equal trade rights for all nations with regard to the Western Hemisphere. Moreover, in order to protect ourselves against concerted attack, we must definitely affiliate ourselves with other powers, but we must seek, in this respect, not so much "entangling alliances" as a universal league of the nations.

Mr. Angell was not as explicit as he might have been. Perhaps he really favors the idea in the League to Enforce Peace. He can hardly in reality wish the United States to become a party to one of the old balance-of-power alliances.