When the Senate recently passed a resolution calling for a conference of the powers, notably Japan, Great Britain, and ourselves, for the purpose of reducing armaments, those who had the peace of the world at heart," were delighted. Here at last, it seemed, someone was going to do something definite toward stopping the expenditures now devoted to warlike preparations. But it has already become apparent that we are still a long way from any real results. The Secretary of the Navy is against any such conference. The President, however, is said to like the idea--unofficially of course-- and the majority of the Cabinet are likewise in favor of it--also unofficially.

The difficulty, as explained by the President (unofficially) is that, were we to get together publicly, the delegates would be continually influenced by public opinion in their own countries regarding the proceedings of the meeting. In short, were the conference to sit openly, no delegate would have the temerity to be first to concede anything for fear of public wrath. Here, indeed, is a powerful argument against open diplomacy--it allows the people to say what they want done. He much prefers that we should discuss the matter "sub rosa", at the meetings of the Supreme Council, for example, where there is no danger of interference by the various interested publics.

In plain language, the nations are thought to mistrust each other even more than do the diplomats. Harding has said that while he favors approximate disarmament, the United States must not render itself helpless by disarming in advance of other nations. That is the diplomat's view. The supposed attitude of the various peoples is indicated by the feeling in political circles that secrecy is essential to any advance. It looks like a case of one hundred per cent suspicion all around. But surely if there is any real desire in the world for peace and disarmament, the nations will not be slow to follow anyone who has the courage to be the leader. Why not put disarmament to the test in a "free and open encounter",--and be done?