The Senator Asks: To Prep for War or Build for Peace?
Facing mounting pressure for military expansion as the Great War rages in Europe, U.S. Senator W. L. Jones takes the unusual step of polling Washington constituents on their views.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
U. S. Senator Wesley L. Jones wants to know the views of the people of Washington regarding military preparedness, and has sent out an open letter of inquiry. Jones states he is not an advocate of extensive preparations but wishes to reflect the will of the people. He asks specifically if voters believe a larger standing army is necessary, if they fear imminent attack after the European war concludes, and if they agree that constructing interstate highways along the coast—to mobilize rapid defense—would be a wiser current investment than a massive standing army. Jones argues that the country is currently 'unduly excited' and should prioritize preparing for the commercial competition of the postwar era.
“We are excited over preparedness. There is a disposition to rush immediately into some scheme or plan for increasing our military and naval power regardless of the cost.”
Senator Jones’s 1916 dilemma—balancing international geopolitical pressure with domestic infrastructure and economic development—feels like a precursor to today's debates on national security spending vs. local infrastructure investment. His skepticism of war experts and preference for regional mobilization mirror modern anxieties about federal overreach and local self-determination.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.