OCR Text |
Show y anient problem is satisfactorily settled. set-tled. When it is settled, if it ever is. another source of international friction fric-tion will be removed, but it does not hasten the cause of peace to predict, without reason, that everything is practically agreed on and nothing much more remains aside from ratification rati-fication of the details of the program. pro-gram. The nations interested must natui--ally proceed slowly and . carefully. While they may desire a lessening of the naval burdens, they cannot ignore ig-nore entirely their national needs, and this is as true of the United States as of Great Britain or any other country. For instance: it will not do to say that because there are three thousand miles of ocean between the United States and Europe, an adequate ade-quate navy for Uncle Sam is not necessary. Our merchant marine is growing and our trade can be found on every sea. In case of hostilities between be-tween the United States and another nation, or between two foreign naval dent Hoover, advocate moderate changes which experience has proven necessary. The first class would allow foreign goods to flood the American market at prices which domestic manufacturers, manufactur-ers, paying high wages, could not meet. The result would be a higher cost of living and an imperiled foreign for-eign trade. If foreign producers could not sell their goods here, they would have no money with which to buy our exports. The logical attitude is that of the third class. They realize that American Ameri-can industries and workers must be protected; but they realize likewise that fail', equal competition, made possible by reasonable tariff duties, is bfest for all concerned. Certain sections of our present tariff tar-iff undoubtedly need revision, either upward or downward as conditions warrant. Sound business principles, not emotion or politics, should dictate the changes. : FREEDOM OF THE SEAS. During the past week or two there has been a noticeable slowing down in the enthusiastic' predictions in America Am-erica and England of an immediate solution of the naval armament question. ques-tion. While the plans are going forward for-ward arjd there can be no . doubt that sooner or later a conference will be held to discuss this all important question, it is equally true that much water must flow through tiie Potomac Potom-ac and Thames before th5 disarm- powersl, the prosperity and progress of the people of the United States could seriously interfered with in case we had no adequate navy to insist on our rights and protect our foreign trade.- There are many questions to be settled set-tled before there can be complete naval accord between the United States and Great Britain. One of the j most troublesome of these questions is freedom, of the seas, a question so much discussed during the World War and then, unfortunately, lost sight of during the framing of the Versailles treaty. Great Britain and the United States have never ''seen alike" on the question of the freedom of the seas. Until these two great nations na-tions do see alike there is a prospect of trouble no matter what sort of disarmament agreement is entered into. The question is complicated too by the declared right of the League of Nations to boycott an aggressor nation in case of war. Now in case of trouble between two powers, assuming assum-ing the United States not involved, the aggressor would be the one which had the least friends on the governing govern-ing board of the League when the trouble arose. The one which had the most friends or the greatest political pull would be "on the defensive." The "aggressor nation" could ' then be blockaded by the nations in the League. But if Uncle Sam had a different dif-ferent idea about which was the aggressor ag-gressor nation, what would he do about it, and to what degree would he insist on his right to the freedom of the seas? In case of war, Great Britain Brit-ain for centuries has assumed herself to be the "mistress of the seas" and she has played her part well. The British admirality therefore is apt to have an entirely different view from the American admiralty as to what should be considered "freedom of the j seas." Here is a question, therefore, which requires settlement before there can be complete peace and agreement on the naval question. And it is not a question which can be easily settled. It is full of complications and packed with dynamite. That it will be settled satisfactorily is of course the hop3 of all Americans who desire1 nothing more than to live at peace with the other nations of the world. But it is there just the j same and nothing will be gained by ignoring it and claiming that "every- . thing is over but the shotting." i |