Before answering this question, let us realize clearly that one
of the strongest reasons that leads a country to abstain from war,
even to seek relief from wrongs, actual or imagined, is a doubt
of success; and that that reason disappears if another country,
sufficiently powerful to assure success, is ready to help her,
either by joining openly with her, or by seeking war herself at
the same time with the same country. As we all know, cases like
this have happened in the past. Great Britain knows it; and the
main secret of her wealth is that she has always been strong enough
to fight any two countries.

It is plain that a coalition of two countries against us is possible
now. The United States is regarded with feelings of extreme irritation
by the two most warlike nations in the world, one on our eastern side
and the other on the western. War with either one would call for
all the energies of the country, and the issue would be doubtful.
But if either country should consider itself compelled to declare
war, the other, if free at the time, might see her opportunity to
declare war simultaneously. The result would be the same as if
we fought Great Britain, except that our Pacific coast would be
blockaded besides the Atlantic, and we should have to pay indemnity
to two countries instead of to one country.

A coalition between these two countries would be an ideal arrangement,
because it would enable each country to force us to grant the conditions
it desires, and secure a large indemnity besides.

Would Great Britain interfere in our behalf? This can be answered
by the man so wise that he knows what the international situation
and the commercial situation will be ten years hence. Let him speak.