that we were not departing from that policy: our rights
on the seas had really been invaded by murderous submarine
attacks on neutral ships and on enemy merchant ships, bear-
ing our citizens. And they had a right, under international
law, to be there.

When we got into the war Mr. Wilson stated -- and I
never heard any objection from anybody -- that our pur-
pose in this war was to make the world safe for democracy.
Not the United States, the world. It was to suppress mili-
tarism. Where? Not in the United States. Not in
Europe. In the world. To say that we are not to take
our part in world politics is to ignore just exactly where
we are, what our position is -- a position we cannot escape
from.

We have made an armistice, we have imposed terms on
Germany with respect to that armistice; but we made that
armistice on a basis of a treaty which was to deal in a
general way with fields that were outlined in the message of
January 8, 1918, as amended by the Allies before the armis-
tice was submitted to the Germans. One amendment refer-
red to the freedom of the seas, the Entente Allies reserving
the right to deal with that subject as they were advised.
The other concerned the meaning of the word " restoration,"
which was made entirely free from doubt with reference to
indemnities.

That is the basis of the treaty; those are the fields to be
covered in the treaty. And now it is a matter of good
faith, as I understand, between the parties.

How are you going to regulate the question of how much
armament each nation shall have? How maintain the limit

-157-