and of energy in rebuilding houses which have fallen into ruin. And as to "virility", we do not see why this should be shown at its best in murdering other people. We think that a good deal of virile virtue is required to build a locomotive or to run one at full speed. Men who plan and build railways or bridges require at least as much "virile" virtue as men who plan battles. Men who plough land, or who open up wild countries require quite a lot of virility. Doctors who risk their lives in laboratories, nurses who look after mad people or after patients suffering from contagious diseases require great courage. We are not at all sure that soldiers would not prefer to go to a battle than to look after a patiënt who has the Plague, or to explore countries where the natives are cannibals. As it is, there is such a tremendous lot of misery in the world, that, without war, Mankind will have more than sufficiënt opportunity for showing virility and courage for centuries to come. If we should have War to brace us up, we might just as well promote the spread of Cholera or Plague. That would come cheaper in the end, as these diseases at least do not mean much material damage, and leave no enmity behind them.
As to courage, required for War, we ask whether it is really courage in the best sense of the word, to plan a battle on the principle that you must only give battle when you are sure that you are the strongest. There is also a good deal of running away in good strategy. Is that courage ? With troops who are volunteers