EDITORIALS
HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
Every twenty-five years, on the average, the American nation has waged war with an important civilized power. Again, as on previous occasions we find ourselves involved in a great struggle, on the outcome of which our existence as an independent nation probably depends, with practically no preparation having been made in advance to meet the issue. Not to go further back than 1914, for three years the nation gamboled on the brink of war, making practically no effort to prepare for the struggle the imminence of which was apparent to every reasoning person. As we write these lines the daily paper brings to our desk a story from the Secretary of War, intended to be thrilling, of how, after war was declared, an airplane engine was devised for adoption by our government. America was the original home of the aeroplane, yet we began the present war as little equipped, to all practical purposes, to wage it in the air as were our forefathers of 1776.
This is but typical of our situation as a whole. When war was declared we had ample potential resources in men, material, and initiative, but we had no army and only an inadequate navy; and while these are being evolved at a prodigious expenditure of labor and money, the enemy is kept from our gates by virtue of no foresight of ours, but rather by the good fortune which has given us powerful allies whose armies and navies are fighting in our behalf.
OUR MILITARY RECORD
Thus has it ever been when America went to war. The pages of our history teem with disasters for which our happy-go-lucky attitude toward all things military is responsible. Curiously enough, in the very face of such a record, flourishes
a popular conviction that the history of our warfare is one of triumph succeeding triumph with monotonous regularity; and that with respect to our armies, if in no other thing, America has far excelled the other peoples of the earth. That this is all a ghastly illusion any one who has access to a respectable library can quickly satisfy himself. The simple truth is that our past military record has been far from extraordinary; that Americans considered as individuals are no braver than other people; and that when these individuals are associated in armies they require much the same degree of organization, equipment, and leadership as other armies do, if the record they make is to constitute pleasant reading for the nation that sends them forth to war.
It behooves us to note in this connection that no other type of human activity calls for so high a degree of organization and discipline as does the waging of civilized war; and further, that as a consequence of the industrial development of the last century the handicap of a nation which is unprepared to defend itself, in a contest with one which has thus prepared, is vastly greater than ever before. The ancient Gauls and Germans were able to wage a respectable fight against so mighty a military machine as the legions of Julius Caesar, and on one notable occasion, a few years later, a great imperial army was utterly destroyed by the forest barbarians. In modern times the small armies of England have marched at will over Africa, and the fanatic bravery of the tribesmen has led to no other result than their more certain and speedy slaughter at the hands of their civilized foemen. Returning to our own history, the American militiaman of Revolutionary days was no match for the British regular; and, popular belief to the contrary, the naval War of 1812 was not won by America. Even were the contrary the case, however, it would avail us nothing at the present time, for the art of warfare and the circumstances of human life have alike undergone a complete revolution during the last hundred years. Mr. Bryan’s fanciful vision of a million men springing to arms at the first note of danger is but an empty myth, but unfortunately it is by no means a harmless one. The nation which neglects to set its defenses in order in advance of the emergency is, under modern conditions, doomed to defeat before war shall have been declared.
But what avail, it may be asked, is it to dwell upon our past military mistakes? None, certainly, unless we are capable as a people of profiting by the school of experience. Thus far, in the matter under discussion, our national good luck, inducing, as it has done, a quite unwarranted feeling of security, has prevented us from doing so. That we are permanently incapacitated from guiding our feet by the lamp of experience, however, the writer at least does not believe. To a limited extent, indeed, in the conduct of the present war, we have already evinced a willingness to avoid repeating our past mistakes. The question of preparation in advance of the conflict aside, the preliminary stage of the current war has been waged in materially better fashion than has that of any of our previous wars. In particular the principle of universal liability to service has been adopted and an earnest effort has been made to provide as officers, men who combine with a high degree of natural capacity at least a modicum of training for the work intrusted to their charge.
These things are well enough in their way, and encouraging as indicative of the development of a more intelligent attitude on the part of our people toward the conduct of the military arm of the government. No longer, apparently, can a runaway boy of sixteen convince a secretary of war, as in the old days, that his desire for a commission in the army entitles him to precedence over graduates of West Point; nor will we again witness the spectacle of our president appointing all the officers of a newly-created military unit direct from civil life on the ground that the country “generally expected” our trained soldiers should thus be ignored. However gratifying this may be, the nub of the present situation lies in the fact that whatever has been done thus far has been with a view solely to meeting a present emergency. The country has not determined upon, and the government has not adopted any permanent or general policy. Sooner or
later the present war will end. Shall we then, as in 1815 and 1865, disband our military force and have recourse once more to the old policy of trusting to Providence for the protection of our liberty and our existence as a nation? Or shall we now highly resolve that the destinies of the American people are too precious, that the success of our great experiment in democracy is charged with too much importance, not alone to ourselves but to the remainder of mankind as well, to justify us in leaving it absolutely unprotected in a world of potential enemies? What would be thought today of a city which should maintain no police department, and for protection against fire should depend upon the unorganized efforts of volunteers? Scarcely two centuries ago, however, even the chief city of the world had no police department, while within the memory of men now living our cities depended upon volunteers for protection against fire.
In these matters the obvious lesson of experience has been thoroughly learned. Professional police and fire departments are the standing armies of our cities, highly organized and constantly alert to protect them from the perils of disorder and fire. The American people will not permanently be content to display a lower order of intelligence in national affairs than it does in those of merely municipal concern. Too long, however, have we confided the protection of our national existence to Providence. We believe it to be the duty of every citizen to exert the full measure of his influence upon his governmental representatives to the end that now, before national disaster shall have overtaken us, a permanent military policy adequate to our protection be adopted.
AN APPRECIATION AND A SUGGESTION
The September number of the Magazine contained news of the bequest to the Society by Miss Genevieve Mills of Madison of her interest in the parental homestead. We return to the subject now for a twofold reason. In the first
place it is proper to render adequate formal acknowledgment of the fine gift made by Miss Mills to the Society. Of vain or ill-advised memorials to the departed, America affords numerous examples; the wisdom and appropriateness of Miss Mills’s memorial to her parents appears, by contrast with some of these, all the more obvious. Money which might have gone to the building of a useless pile of granite has been devoted to the perpetual enrichment of the commonwealth, to the upbuilding of which Simeon and Maria Mills dedicated their lives. To illustrate concretely the work which the Mills bequest will perform, the annual income from the estimated value of the estate will suffice to pay the entire cost of publication of this magazine; or it will print annually such a volume as those included in the Collections of the Society. If the cost of authorship as well as printing be charged against the fund, it will suffice to produce a volume of our Collections every two or three years. And this work, without exhausting the principal of the fund, is to go on perpetually.
If the present world war has taught any lesson, it is that of the value to a nation of its civic and patriotic ideals. But these cannot be cultivated unless due regard be paid to the preservation and study of the country’s historical records. Thus Miss Mills’s bequest constitutes a permanent factor making for the development of patriotism in our commonwealth. Well would it be if all givers of funds for a public purpose should display equal wisdom. At the present time, we understand, the Norwegians of Wisconsin are contemplating the erection of an expensive memorial to Colonel Heg of the Fifteenth Wisconsin Infantry, the famed Norwegian regiment. That Colonel Heg richly deserves a suitable memorial no one will be disposed to dispute. The establishment of a perpetual fund, the income of which should be devoted to the study of the Norwegian contribution to Wisconsin and American history, would constitute, we respectfully suggest, a more useful and suitable memorial to Colonel Heg than any bronze or granite pile, however costly it may be.
He slipped into the office with a quiet apology for the intrusion, to say that he had enlisted in the naval reserve. Not expecting to be called for a month or more, the call to service had come immediately. His only concern over this was due to the fact that he must leave the Library on such short notice, and he was distressed to think that his leaving thus might inconvenience those who remained behind. Two years ago he had entered our employ, in the hope that proximity to the University would render it possible, while earning his living, to take part-time work on the hill. So thorough was his industry that before long, aside from his full-time employment (with service faithfully rendered), he was carrying two-thirds of normal undergraduate work. How he carried it is indicated by the fact that, though preparing himself for an engineer, he was prevented from winning the annual prize for excellence in English composition only by virtue of the limitation of the award to students doing full-time work.
Thus the Library lost a faithful worker; thus the nation gained an excellent soldier. Of such stuff are the men of our new army made. Unless we mistake greatly, the German nation will live to rue the course by which its government goaded the American people to the point of taking active part in settling the great question whether autocracy or democracy shall perish. Quietly and without heroics our splendid youth have appraised the situation, and having appraised it, with a smile have offered themselves and their hopeful futures upon the altar of human freedom, only regretting as did our particular hero, the inconvenience to others which their sacrifice may involve. We will not offend his modesty by placing his name in type. To him and all his kind we offer a reverent Godspeed. The nobility of their offering is inspiring enough; that it should have been necessary in the full light of the twentieth century is one of the ghastliest facts in human history.