There has at various times during the war been a good deal of discussion of the advantages to be gained from interposing a “cooling-off period” between the conclusion of hostilities in the obvious sense and the formal execution of an elaborate peace treaty. During such a possibly prolonged period of armistice (or whatever else it might be called), some of the passions generated during the war, it is hoped, might be mitigated, and an opportunity given for more leisurely, and therefore more intelligent and farsighted, investigation of many of the knotty problems to which during the war busy statesmen can scarcely be expected to apply their minds.

The attractiveness of this idea is obvious enough. It would be an inestimable benefit if somehow or other we could ensure that the postwar settlement would be made by people immune from the passions and hatreds which on all sides are likely to generate clouded and distorted thinking after the war. And it is equally obvious that, even with the most careful preparation now, there will, at the conclusion of the war, still be questions of first-rate importance, about which few people whose judgment merited respect would be prepared to offer confident solutions for immediate application. And even if they had confidence in their judgments on these issues, they are unlikely during the war to make as much progress as might be desired in convincing all the parties whose coöperation will be essential for the execution of their plans of the wisdom of their views.