（三月十九夜）

AN OPEN LEITER TO ALL CHINESE STUDENTS

My dear Brethren:

If I may judge from the sentiments expressed in the last issue ofthe Monthly, I am afraid we have completely lost our heads, and have gone mad. "Fight and be vanquished, if we must", says one Club. Even Mr. W. K. Chung, a Christian of mature thought, declares in fiery eloquence: "Even if we fight and be defeated and consequently suffer the disgrace of losing our country, —even this course should be inevitable and preordained. I still say, we could not but choose to fight…Let us fight and be conquered like Belgium." Even our Editor-in-chief who in his editorials advised us that hotheads have no place in the deliberation of such great national danger and that we should consult our heads as well as our hearts, —even he writes on another page: "The Chinese will have no choice (which they will not hesitate to make) but to fight!"

Now, let me say that all this is pure insanity. We have lost our heads. We are excited, nervous, nay, "patriotically insane. "My Brethren, it is absolutely useless to get excited at such a critical moment. No excitement, nor high-sounding sentiments, nor sensational suggestions, have ever helped any nation. Talking of fighting "on paper" is the most shallow course for us to take, who call ourselves "students" and "capable men".

It seems to me that the right course for us students to take at this moment and at this distance from China, is this. Let us be calm. Let us DO OUR DUTY which is TO STUDY. Let us not be carried away by the turmoil of the newspaper from our serious mission. Let us apply ourselves seriously, calmly, undisturbedly and unshakenly to our studies, and PREPARE OURSELVES to uplift our fatherland, if she survives this crisis—as I am sure she will, —or to resurrect her from the dead, if it needs be!

My Brethren. THAT is our duty and our right course!

I say, talking of fighting Japan at this present moment is insanity. For how can we fight? Our Editor-in-chief says that we have the fighting strength of one million determined soldiers. Let us look at the facts, we have at most 120,000 soldiers that can be called "trained", but poorly equipped. And we have absolutely no navy: the largest vessel in our navy is a third-class cruiser with a displacement of 4,300 tons. And how about munitions? What shall we fight with?

So I say with all sincerity and with all devotion to China, that it is pure nonsense and foolishness to talk of fighting when there is not the slightest chance of gaining anything but devastation, and devastation, and devastation!

And you talk of Belgium—of heroic Belgium! My dear Brethren, let me tell you with all my heart and soul that to resist the tide of an ocean with a single hand is no heroism, and that to strike an egg against a rock is no heroism! Moreover. Belgium did not contemplate such an utter defeat. Read such books asHow Belgium Saved Europeby Dr. Charles Sarolea of Belgium, and you will see that she was sure of French assistance and of British support. And she was confident of her Liege and her Antwerp which had the reputation of being the strongest fortifications in the world. So Belgium staked all her fortune for the "glory" of being a heroic nation! Was that true courage? Was that true heroism?

And my Brethren. think of Belgium and of the Belgians of today! Is the "glory" of heroism worth all the sacrifice?

I am not blaming the Belgians. What I want to point out here is that Belgium is not worth China's imitating, and that whosoever wishes China to follow Belgium's path and fate is sinning against China.

In conclusion. let me repeat: DO NOT GET EXCITED: LET US DO OUR DUTY WHICH IS TO STUDY.

The final solution of the Far Eastern Question is not to be sought in fighting Japan at present; nor in any external interference by any other Power or Powers; nor in any temporary relief such as the equilibrium of powers or that of the Open Door; nor in any such proposal as the Japanese Monroe Doctrine. The real and final solution must be sought somewhereelse—far, far deeper than most of us now suspect. I do not know wherein it lies: I only know wherein it does not lie. Let us study it out calmly and dispassionately.

Read this letter carefully before you condemn me.

Very earnestly.

Your brother.

Suh Hu

Ithaca. N. Y.

致留学界公函

诸位：

以上月期刊中各位所表示之义愤观之，余担忧吾辈皆头脑发热，理智失常。某一学生会以为“吾辈非战即死”。甚至连这位通情达理之基督徒——W·K·钟君也义愤填膺，宣称“倘使吾辈命中注定：凡战必败，终要遭受亡国之辱，余仍要说，吾辈别无选择，只有决一死战……宁可像比国人一样，非战即死。”甚至连该刊主笔先生，日前还在社论中劝诫众人，在此民族危亡之际，切不可鲁莽行事，乱了方寸，义愤之馀还须诉诸理智，如今他也在另一文中写道：“中国人别无选择，只有决一死战！（国人将毫不犹豫作此选择）”

此刻，余要说上述言论完全是疯话。吾辈情绪激动，神经紧张，理智失常，可以说是得了“爱国癫”。诸位，在此危急关头，情绪激动是决无益处的。激动之情绪，慷慨激昂之爱国呼号，危言耸听之条陈，未尝有助于国。吾辈自称“学子”、“干材”，若只是“纸上”谈兵，则此举未免过于肤浅。

以余观之，吾辈学子，远去祖国，爱莫能助；当务之急，当以镇静处之。让吾等各就本分，各尽责职；吾辈之责任乃是读书学习。不可让报章上所传之纠纷，耽误吾辈之学业。吾等正要严肃、冷静、不惊、不慌，安于学业，力争上流，为将来振兴祖国作好一番准备，只要她能幸免于难——余深信如此——若是不能，吾辈将为在废墟上重建家园而努力！

诸位，这才是吾辈之责任！才是吾辈之当务之急！

余以为，此刻言及对日作战，简直是发疯。我何以作战？主笔先生说，我有一百万敢决一死战之雄狮。且让大家来看一下事实：我仅有十二万士兵谈得上是“训练有素”的，然其装备甚为简陋。而且，我海军毫无战斗力：军中最大之战舰乃一三等巡洋舰，其排水吨位仅为四千三百吨。另外，军火又如何呢？我何以作战？

余赤诚以报祖国，此时言及作战，纯系一派胡言，愚不可及。其后果，不仅于国无所改观，而且所得只是任人蹂躏！任人蹂躏！再任人蹂躏！

至于说到比国——那个英勇的比利时！诸位，余要披沥肝胆向你们陈述：螳臂挡车、以卵击石决不是英雄主义！更何况比国当时也不曾料想有今日之惨败。奉劝诸位读一读，由比国人查理·沙罗利博士撰写的《比利时如何拯救欧洲》一书吧。盖比利时深知，一旦战争爆发，英法两国必然赴援。加以列日和安特卫普享有全世界最坚固堡垒之美誉，比国人自信此二城市固若金汤有恃无恐。于是，比国人才为国家之荣誉而孤注一掷！试问，这是真正的勇敢吗？这是真正的英雄气概吗？

诸位，看一看比国，想一想今日之比国人罢！试问，为这种英雄主义之“光彩”而作出全部之牺牲，值得吗？

余并无指责比国人之意。在此，余想指明的是，比国并不值得中国仿效。任何人，若想硬要中国重蹈比国之覆辙，则无异于是对祖国之亵渎。

综上所述，余再重申前言：切勿感情用事：让吾等各就本分，各尽责职，吾辈之责任乃是学习。

远东问题最终解决之症结，不系于对日作战，不系于某些列强施加之外来干涉；不系于任何治标之方法，也不是由列强在华势力均衡或门户开放政策所造成的；更不系于采用日本之门罗主义；凡此种种皆不是最终解决之方法。真正、最终解决之道一定是另有法门——它较吾人今日所想象者当更为深奥。余也不知其在何处，只知它不在哪些地方罢了。还是让吾辈作些冷静、客观之研究吧！从长计议罢！

深盼诸位在詈骂余之前，细读拙文，实不胜企祷之至！

诸位之弟胡适　谨上

纽约，绮色佳