EDITOR'S TABLE. 



SS7 



country in the true sense is one that 

 evokes this feeling in its sons and 

 daughters, and evokes it not less in 

 times of peace than in times of war. 



It may here be remarked that the 

 ambiguity of the word " great," as 

 applied both to men and to nations, 

 is the source of no slight perversion 

 of moral judgment. When a man 

 is spoken of as a " great "' man with- 

 out qualification, the inference is only 

 too readily drawn that he is one who 

 may serve as a model for imitation; 

 and yet many so-called great men 

 have had the most serious vices of 

 character, and many have been guil- 

 ty of the most appalling crimes. 

 " Even so," their eulogists contend, 

 *' it can not be denied that they were 

 great." So be it, only let it be un- 

 derstood that the word great so em- 

 ployed has no necessary connotation 

 of moral excellence, of superior hu- 

 manity, or of any of the qualities 

 which might entitle a man to the 

 love and gratitude of his fellows. 

 The trouble is that, make what re- 

 serves we may, the word, as often as 

 it is used, creates illusion, or else has 

 the equally disastrous effect of mak- 

 ing us think that where ''greatness" 

 is concerned moral considerations are 

 of quite inferior importance. 



So, when we speak of a great coun - 

 try, we are only too apt to think of 

 its wealth and strength, and only too 

 readily ignore the elements which go 

 to make up a really great national 

 character and a prosperous and stable 

 commonwealth. We do not care to 

 ask how it got its gold, or what it is 

 doing with it, or at what moral cost 

 it is maintaining its military organi- 

 zation. We do not ask whether lib- 

 erty is flourishing within its borders, 

 or whether its people are strong in 

 the sum of their qualities, in energy, 

 in resourcefulness, in a sense of pub- 

 lic duty. We are ready to consider 

 these things at other times; but the 

 spectacle of militarj- strength imposes 



on our imaginations; and, in school- 

 boy fashion, we account that nation 

 especially great that has all its prep- 

 arations made for striking a deadly 

 blow at an enemy in the shortest pos- 

 sible time. It is lamentable that, in a 

 country like this, such views should 

 prevail to the extent to which they 

 do, and that a large proportion of 

 our people should have become en- 

 amored of the military ideal. The 

 evil resulting from such a state of 

 opinion is twofold : a wrong direc- 

 tion is likely to be given to our for- 

 eign policy, and the internal devel- 

 opment of the country is in danger 

 of receiving a serious check. 



For, let it never be forgotten that 

 the gi'eat problem which every com- 

 munity is set to solve is the prob- 

 lem of social evolution under the 

 guidance of the principle of justice. 

 Even the most military communities 

 are working at this problem in their 

 own way, but under disadvantages 

 directly proportioned to the extent of 

 their military organization and the 

 amount of national energy which it 

 absorbs. No reasonable person will 

 deny that the highest well-being of 

 any state depends uj)on the equity 

 with which its laws are administered, 

 the protection accorded to individual 

 rights, and the scope allowed to indi- 

 vidual initiative and energy. No 

 one will deny either that the intel- 

 lectual and moral condition of a peo- 

 ■ pie is, with reference to the ultimate 

 ends of human existence, of vastly 

 more account than their prepared- 

 ness for ofi^ensive warfare. If these 

 propositions are admitted, how can it 

 be regarded otherwise than as a ca- 

 lamity that the ambition of our peo- 

 ple, whose position is so eminently 

 favorable to peaceful development, 

 should be diverted into military chan- 

 nels and turned tow^ard military 

 ideals ? Some day we shall have to 

 turn back and seek for things that 

 make for peace, the things that tend 



