There is something altogether wrong in this picture. The pattern is not right. It is so fantastically illogical that the mind refuses to accept it. One asks, why, when the members of certain races and nations have been brought up for generations in a faith that condemns war and violence of any kind, and preaches universal brotherhoed and love toward all humanity, they are always so ready to go to war and eager to resort to violence to secure what they want or consider to be their rights?

Obviously there is some factor making towards war that is far more potent than the strongest religious beliefs against it. It behoves us to discover just what this factor is and how to overcome it if we are to put a stop to the thing that we all dread yet forever bow before as inevitable.

Is war beneficial to the human race? Is war necessary? Has it any advantages, and, if so, do they outweigh its disadvantages?

Fundamentally, of course, the force behind warfare and violence is the economic urge. While there are and always will be a certain member of individuals in any given community who love fighting for its own sake, the presence of these warlike elements is a defensive and offensive provision of Nature in the human social group that is equivalent to the presence of the "soldier" units in the termitery. The majority of the people. however, are perfectly willing to live quiet and peaceful lives, like the "workers" in a white ant colony, so long as their creature comforts and needs are assured. But when these are denied them, or are even jeopardized, peaceful twentieth century citizens, like their savage Stone Age forefathers, are liable to become fighting maniacs.

War is definitelv concommitant with the economic factor in the life history of the human species. The conditions that are making for war at the present moment in various parts of the world are all purely economic or have an economic basis or background. Japan's industrial and resultant commercial expansion in the Pacific region threatens both British and American interests of a similar nature, hence the unstable political situation in this great area. The coal fields of the Saar are vital to the industrial development of both France and Germany, particularly the latter, hence the tense situation that exists in Europe over the forthcoming plebiscite.

The violation of treaties, the assassination of rulers or dictators, or offensive and defensive alliances are cited as causes for war, but they are seldom the real ones. Almost always behind them is to be found the economic urge in one or another of its many phases.

Thus when Rome and Carthage set out to destroy one another in the Punic wars in the two centuries before the Christian era, it was them astery of the then known world for which they fought, that their citizens might be clothed and housed in luxury, that nnumerable slaves might work for them and that Gaul, Spain, North Mrica and what is now known as the Near East might provide them with a bountiful food supply.

In later times, when Great Britain and other European nations were exploring the world and marking off great sections of the other continents as their own, they were merely making provision for their rapidly increasing home populations by providing settling space for the overflow and ensuring markets for the preducts of their ever growing industries.

And when Japan referred to Manchuria as her "life line," she was only saying in another way that the control of the territory of the Three Eastern Provinces was essential to her economic existence.

There are plenty of people, both of the West and of the East, who honestly believe in war. They point out the material gains that may accrue through a successfully conducted campalgn. They lay emphasis on the high qualities of courage and self sacrifice that it calls forth in the sons of the nation. They point to the wonderful example these heroes set the youths of the next generation. They say that for every hero who dies on the battlefield a hundred young men are made finer a,nd nobler because of the example thus set. They argue that when a nation is no longer ready or willing to go to war, it has become effete and is on the way to extinction.

But when everything that can be said in favour of war has been entered up and we turn to look at the other side of the ledger, we cannot help realizing that there is an enormous debit balance.

History has proved over and over again that wars deplete the strength of a nation, even successful wars. Many great nations of the past have gone down because the flower of their manhood was killed off in the wars they waged. It is impossible to continue draining a country of its physically best stock and at the same time maintain a high physical or mental standard. Except in the manufacture of instruments of destruction and the discovery of new and more hideous means of killing or maining our fellow beings, war puts a stop to progress for the time being, and there never was a war which was not followed by a long peried of depression for victor and vanquished alike, more disasterous, perhaps, than the war itself.

And what, it may be asked, is the making of a few heroes, eager and ready to do a little hit of killing on their own account to prove their heroism, compared with the sufferings of millions of women and children whose voices ring out ever "hoarser with anguish as the ages roll" as the result of our stupid wars?

The moral deterioration that sets in after a country has been engaged in a major struggle alone is an adequate argument against war, but, taken with the wastage of life and property, the drain upon the nation's energy, the appalling suffering and the terrible misery that war entails, it makes the argument so overwhelming that it is difficult to conceive of there being people considering themselves sane who can believe in war.

But this cannot go on. Either the human family has got to cease from wars, or, as has been truly said; it will destroy itself by its own inventive genius. A choice must be made now in favour of peace, for the whole business of war is becoming altogether too dangerous to the human race, even threatening it with extinction.

The next war, if we allow one to take place, will be waged by military, naval and air forces against cities and civilians as being the most vulnerable and vital part of the enemy; and what that means is too terrible to contemplate. Yet we go on armmg our young men to do just this. We are on the verge of another big rmaments race. Many of the great nations are busy manufacturing fighting and bombing aeroplanes, not only for themselves but for other countries unable to make these death-dealing war machines. China is buying them as fast as she can raise the money to pay for them. Germany has recently been accused of increasing her military air fleet till it is becoming a aerious menace to Great Britain. Rumours persist that Japan's munition factories are working at top pressure.

Is there to be another world war in 1935, as has been persistently predicted? It would almost seem so. The people of the countries likely to be involved, who will be the main sufferers, seem unable to do or say anything to stop it. The militarista have the upper hand, and they represent the members of the community who like war and fightiug for their own sake. War is their profession. War means promotion to them. So they want war.

The arms manufacturers, too, want war. War to them means big orders and huge profits. And the ordinary member of the community pays. He pays in money for the arms and ammunition, and in blood for the ambitions of the militarists.

The terrible part of the whole wretehed business is that no one nation really dares take the lead in actually disarming. As pointed out by Mr. Baldwin recently, a weak and vulnerable Britain would make the situation in Europe even more unstable than it is now.

With Germany rearming, France dares not disarm, but must increase her armaments. America must at least maintain her present military and naval strength, if not increase them, as long as Japan continues the policy upon which she has embarked.

Fortunately we have some leaders who appear to be doing their utmost to promote peace and to eliminate war, but their's is a hard task. What is more, their efforts will be useless unless one thing happens. The only thing that can prevent war on a hitherto ndreamed of scale is for the people of all nations to make their voices heard in one vast and vigorous protest, telling their leaders that they will not tolerate war, that they refuse to pay for war, and that unless some means of avoiding it can be found, they, the leaders, will be deposed. It is the people's business. It is for the people to act. Only when the professional war mongers have been eliminated can there be peace on earth and goodwill toward men.