sity to defend the freedom of the seas, the great purpose to be achieved had at last become clear.

On Memorial Day, 1916, at Arlington National Cemetery, the President came back to the same theme in answer to criticism which had recalled with emphatic

... there must be a common agreement for a common object, and . . . at the heart of that common object must lie the inviolable rights of peoples and mankind. . . . We believe these fundamental things: First, that every people has a right to choose the sovereignty under which they shall live. . . . Second, that the small states of the world have a right to enjoy the same respect for their sovereignty and for their territorial integrity that great and powerful nations expect and insist upon. And, third, that the world has a right to be free from every disturbance of its peace that has its origin in aggression and disregard of the rights of peoples and nations."

With this statement of aims the President went on to give expression to his belief regarding the means to attain them. He was convinced that there should be "an universal association of nations to maintain the inviolate security of the highway of the seas for the common and unhindered use of all the nations of the world, and to prevent any war begun either contrary to treaty covenant or without warning and full submission of the causes to the opinion of the world,— a virtual guarantee of territorial integrity and political independence." And he ventured to assert, with full consciousness of his position as spokesman for his people as well as for his government,

66

that the United States is willing to become a partner in any feasible association of nations formed in order to realize these objects and make them secure against violation." If the President were to be forced into a war, by the neces

sity to defend the freedom of the seas, the great purpose to be achieved had at last become clear.

On Memorial Day, 1916, at Arlington National Cemetery, the President came back to the same theme in answer to criticism which had recalled with emphatic approval Washington's warning1 against "entangling alliances." (Statement No. 61.) He said: "I shall never myself consent to an entangling alliance, but I would gladly assent to a disentangling alliance—an alliance which would disentangle the peoples of the world from those combinations in which they seek their own separate and private interests and unite the people of the world to preserve the peace of the world upon a basis of common right and justice. There is liberty there, not limitation. There is freedom, not entanglement. There is achievement of the highest things for which the United States has declared its principle." And he reaffirmed his belief" that the people of the United States were ready to become partners in any alliance of the nations that would guarantee public right above selfish aggression."

During these six months, December, 1915, to June, 1916, President Wilson advanced the first half of his preparedness program,- the military half, the strengthening of the army and navy of the United States. Doubtless he regarded other kinds of preparedness as of even greater

1 Washington's advice had been used before in criticism of Wilson at the time of the "A. B. C." mediation in Mexico. Infa, p. 37.

. . . there must be a common agreement for a common object, and . . . at the heart of that common object must lie the inviolable rights of peoples and mankind. . . . We believe these fundamental things: First, that every people has a right to choose the sovereignty under which they shall live. . . . Second, that the small states of the world have a right to enjoy the same respect for their sovereignty and for their territorial integrity that great and powerful nations expect and insist upon. And, third, that the world has a right to be free from every disturbance of its peace that has its origin in aggression and disregard of the rights of peoples and nations."

With this statement of aims the President went on to give expression to his belief regarding the means to attain them. He was convinced that there should be "an universal association of nations to maintain the inviolate security of the highway of the seas for the common and unhindered use of all the nations of the world, and to prevent any war begun either contrary to treaty covenant or without warning and full submission of the causes to the opinion of the world,- a virtual guarantee of territorial integrity and political independence." And he ventured to assert, with full consciousness of his position as spokesman for his people as well as for his government, "that the United States is willing to become a partner in any feasible association of nations formed in order to realize these objects and make them secure against violation." If the President were to be forced into a war, by the neces

sity to defend the freedom of the seas, the great purpose

to be achieved had at last become clear.

On Memorial Day, 1916, at Arlington National Cemetery, the President came back to the same theme in answer to criticism which had recalled with emphatic approval Washington's warning1 against "entangling alliances." (Statement No. 61.) He said: "I shall never myself consent to an entangling alliance, but I would gladly assent to a disentangling alliance—an alliance which would disentangle the peoples of the world from those combinations in which they seek their own separate and private interests and unite the people of the world to preserve the peace of the world upon a basis of common right and justice. There is liberty there, not limitation. There is freedom, not entanglement. There

66

is achievement of the highest things for which the United States has declared its principle." And he reaffirmed his belief that the people of the United States were ready to become partners in any alliance of the nations that would guarantee public right above selfish aggression."

During these six months, December, 1915, to June, 1916, President Wilson advanced the first half of his preparedness program,— the military half, the strengthening of the army and navy of the United States. Doubtless he regarded other kinds of preparedness as of even greater

1 Washington's advice had been used before in criticism of Wilson at the time of the "A. B. C." mediation in Mexico. Infa, p. 37.