(Signed) “Fraternally, E. H. Gohl.”
COMMENT
The Springfield, Mass., Republican (over half column review): “... Brimful of indictment of war ... a valuable book.... Much startling information which ought to be widely disseminated. Peace advocates might well have Mr. Kirkpatrick’s book in their knapsacks. The book is crowded with facts and figures, official reports and other authoritative documents being freely quoted....”
The Chicago Evening Post (two-thirds column review):—“But it [War—What For?] is, in fact, exquisitely designed to capture the interest and win the belief; it is as well calculated to impress its readers as Paine’s ‘Rights of Man.’”
The Louisville, Kentucky, Herald also frankly ranks WAR—WHAT FOR? equal to Paine’s Rights of Man in its power to impress its readers.
Charles Edward Russell, well known to a million readers of Everybody’s Magazine: “... The most powerful blow ever dealt against the insanity of militarism. A remarkable book. No one can escape the logic of its massed-up facts.”
New York American (review by Mr. Edwin Markham, poet): “... He tatters all the shibboleths that influence men to go to war. He masses his facts in a cumulative horror.... His style is telegraphic ... breathless; and he certainly makes a black case against militarism....”
The Progressive Journal of Education: “Here is a book certainly worth while. It is unique—something that stands wholly in a class by itself.... The array of facts ... concerning war, here gathered together, is something more than remarkable....”
The Trenton, New Jersey, Sunday Advertiser: “... A remarkable book on the futility, the brutality and the criminality of war....”
The St. Louis Post-Despatch (editorial on WAR—WHAT FOR?): “... the forces now working for universal peace—to mention but one, there is George R. Kirkpatrick, an American, who has written a book entitled WAR—WHAT FOR? which appears to be making a genuine sensation.... It is well illustrated, is stuffed full of facts and figures.... The jingos of the world will have to get busy and meet thought with thought, and fact with fact.”