March 11, 1915.
Mr. Daniel Kiefer,
My dear Kiefer:
I agree with Mr. Baker that it is too early to know what may be the temper of the people when the conflict ends. Also that the more colossal the losses and the greater the atrocities the more readily will mankind agree on measures aimed to extirpate militarism. For these reasons, I am in favor of being prepared to meet the mental attitude of the people, if they should be in the humor to consider a well defined plan that will guarantee desired results. I believe my plan will go far toward establishing permanent peace, thus practically obviating the necessity for armies and navies. I am also in accord with his view as to the inability of people in general to think of more than one thing at a time. But if they are thinking [page 2] intensely of Peace they should be able to review with some degree of comprehensive intelligence different plans formulated to attain that object. The case would be somewhat analogous to that of a famished man whose one idea was to appease his hunger but who would still be able to exercise good [judgment] in selecting different foods from a well appointed menu.
I think some of the critics of the Coercive Clause in my peace plan regard it as an aggressive rather than a defensive measure as it was intended to be.
C. L. Logan.