A

T first thought, the new Russian slogan, "No annexations, no indemnities," seemed to many people disquieting. Equally disturbing was the announcement that the new government would not accept the treaties made by the old régime, but would demand new affirmations of policy from the Allies. A little reflection ought to bring conviction that such utterances from the new leaders of Russia were not only inevitable, but just and wise.

The Czardom was the greatest weakness and the greatest reproach in the Allied camp. Up to the downfall of Nicholas and his cabinet of traitors it was impossible for any lover of liberty to espouse the Allied cause without serious dread and misgiving concerning the intentions of the Russian autocracy. English and German imperialism and French colonialism were questionable enough, but at least they were known and could be measured and estimated. But Russian purposes seemed as possibly dangerous as Russian promises were surely uncertain. There were Poland and Finland in the past. Rumania and Greece were sacrificed before our eyes in this present. What hope could there be for Armenia or Asia Minor in the future? When that government of tyranny and rottenness collapsed, how could the newly emancipated Russian democracy respect the en

gagements of its recent rulers or believe in their good faith and wisdom? Could that democracy at once take its place by the side of Allied governments which had been closely bound to the wrecked tyranny?

The new Russian leaders had overthrown a monarchy. It is reported that an English statesman, Lord Milner, went to Russia last winter in the hope of advising that monarchy how to preserve itself from destruction. The new Russian leaders had no desire to swallow Asia Minor. Why should they wish to help England and France to divide all Africa between them? The new Russian leaders abjured any claim upon Constantinople. Should they fight to perpetuate England's grip upon Egypt and Bagdad? The new Russian leaders wiped out every trace of the autocratic tyranny in Finland. Must they be bound to support the Czar's agreement with England for the dissection of Persia? or his possible agreement with France for a division of Syria? or his possible agreement with Italy for the control of Albania? The mere statement of such questions makes plain the answer. Even in the midst of war, the new Russian government was justified in notifying the world that Russia would look for an international peace very different from that which had been contemplated,

and that a restatement of aims had become absolutely necesary.

The retention of Prof. Miliukoff in the provisional government was plainly impossible, for he had committed himself to the international status quo, even to the extent of reasserting the Romanoff ambition to rule in Constantinople.

It is difficult to realize how new that world is which was launched by the Russian revolution, new not only for Eastern Europe, but for the whole continent. No wonder that the men who were already distracted with the burdens of war upon all the allied fronts were dismayed by such a complete overturning of plans. They knew not what to expect, and hailed the entrance of America into the struggle, as their only hope of salvation.

But in reality the entrance of the United States into the war will only confirm the radical alteration in the entire character and purpose of the conflict. Unless the Russian democracy goes to some temporary disaster, the two great great democracies should join forces to make the new age complete and permanent. The American will have no more tolerance for the smirch of irresponsible autocracies than the Russian. The principles announced by the new provisional government are practically harmonious with those enunciated in President Wilson's message to the Senate and in his address to Congress on April 2. The President then and there committed this country, while under his administration, to the doctrine

that no nation should seek to extend its policy over any other nation or people, but that every people should be left free to determine its own policy, its own way of development, unhindered, unthreatened, unafraid, the little along with the powerful.

To the test of such a doctrine of free and autonomous nationalities, the Russian leaders want to bring their Allies, before the expenditure of blood and treasure goes any farther. Surely there can be no dissent from this on the part of any nation accepting the principle that governments derive all their just powers from the consent of the governed.

But this first summons from the new democracy has imposed a heavy task upon Great Britain, France and Italy. Can those governments realign themselves with the new world? It is evident that the terms of peace which they set forth a year ago are insufficient and incomplete. "The intentions of his Majesty, the Emperor of Russia, regarding Poland" have no longer any value. The unacknowledged bargain about Constantinople is set aside.

now

The new democracies in the fight have a right to know what they will be asked to sanction concerning the German colonies, as well as concerning the future organization of the Balkan States; to know what principle is to govern the final disposition of Africa as well as of Asia Minor.

The historic phrase, "reparation, restitution, and guarantees," should now have new definitions, in which there should be no reservation for secret diplomacy. Such definitions, the outcome of frank discussions at

Only by meeting this need boldly and unreservedly in the spirit that will "make the world safe for democracy," can the new Russian forces be inspired with that zeal which is requisite for victory. And only in this way is there any hope of disabusing the German people of the belief that their neighbors wish to crush them, or any hope of encouraging the German people to consider how to set their own house in order.

Now that the United States has, fortunately, a seat at the council table of the Allies, America can

We are strategically situated to strengthen the democratic determinations among all the Allies of the Entente, as well as to furnish the sinews of war. The league of nations already exists. But it must be a league of nations to insure justice. Under no other terms can it be fit to enforce peace.

"Our object," said President Wilson last April, "is to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the life of the world as against selfish and autocratic power, and to set up amongst the really free and selfgoverned peoples of the world such a concert of purpose and of action as will henceforth ensure the observance of those principles."

man shall play the part for which he is best fitted. To this end Congress has provided that the nation shall be organized for war by selection; that each man shall be classified for service in the place where it shall best serve the general good to call him.”

The full significance of these words cannot possibly be appreciated except by those who have been careful students of our economic and industrial problems. The possibilities of a nation organized in this manner, even with the knowledge at present available, is beyond our most extrav

agant estimates, for there is information at hand to prove that we are not utilizing more than 20 per cent. of our industrial possibilities. Undoubtedly, many shops are running at a much higher productive capacity than this, but a detailed analysis of available information indicates that the number running at less capacity is very large.

To be sure the operation of many factories throughout the country is being conducted upon a more intelligent basis than in the past. We have had a certain increase in our industrial efficiency. But this injection of efficiency, as such, is not our main problem, whether we have a long war or a short war. Our industrial problem-it is growing acute-is the fact that our industry does not serve either the country or the community. It simply enables a few persons to profit by the labor of others.

The widespread campaign for efficiency, about which we have heard so much, has produced but little result, in the light of the above condition. It is time to inquire why so much energy has been spent to so little purpose. During a visit of a body of engineers to Germany in the summer of 1913, to study the industrial conditions in that country, many of us were convinced that not only was the individual efficiency of the American greater than that of the German, but in many cases the amount of work produced per dollar of wages paid to the American workman was even greater, although the wage-rate in this country was at least 30 per cent. higher than that in Germany.

In spite of this, the collective or cooperative efficiency of the Germans was evidently enormously greater than that of Americans. The German Government not only encouraged cooperation, but actually forced it; while we, actuated by an antique theory of democracy, not only encouraged individualism, but did all we could to insist upon it, with the result that much of the energy of our community was being dissipated in internal friction.

The net power of a community is the total power developed, less that consumed in internal friction. Therefore, if we are to compete with a nation which has reduced to a minimum internal friction, we must do the same, although not necessarily by the same process. In Germany, as a war measure, and even before the beginning of war, the Government to a large extent took over the industries of the country in an autocratic manner, and combined the political and the economic power. The enormous strength which has been developed by this combination makes it clear that to compete successfully with Germany we must make a similar combination.

Congress is rapidly conferring upon the President authority to make such a combination by commandeering the various industrial plants of the community. However, in a combination made in this manner the industries will be run largely by people who have had little experience in production, and hence inefficiency. The better way of making this combination would be to have our indus

trial leaders recognize that the full economic power of the community must no longer serve the individual, but the community as a whole, as has been done in many notable instances. Then combine with that object in view. In a short time such a combination would be of great service to the Federal Government.

The accomplishment of this result will not be possible until industrial leaders have recognized that personal profit must be secondary to public gain. Fortunately for the country. this idea is rapidly spreading and will undoubtedly gain impetus from the strong endorsement the President has given it.

We have come to a crisis in the history of the nation. In the past, business has been frankly run solely for profits. We are face-to-face with a condition which shows us in the clearest possible manner that if we come out victorious in this war such a policy is no longer possible. To effect a revolution such as indicated by these facts means that most of our accounting methods must be revised on the basis of service--a very different basis from that of profits, which has been the sole factor in accounting systems of the past.

The accountant must now shift his allegiance from the financier to the producer. The great shortage of products which is so evident on all hands, is producing another change in our economic conditions. We no longer need salesmen to induce us to buy. We must have buyers who will search out what they need and buy only those things needed.

In the past the salesman has been a potent factor in our economic system, but with all the products of our farms and factories taken up, he can be of little service to the community as a salesman. In a few words, the situation all over the country is changing from one controlled by the financier, aided by the cost accountant and salesman who served him in the harvesting of profits, to one in which the producer must control with an accountant and buyer who serve him in producing the greatest possible amount of usable goods for the well-being of the community as a whole. This is an industrial revolution, and it is taking place before our eyes so rapidly we can hardly realize it. When business becomes reorganized on these lines for the benefit of the community, we shall have a democracy which will be stronger than any autocracy.

We must see to it that the production and manufacture of food and clothing go on double forte. We are going to be short of food and clothes in a little while. The things that appertain directly to war undoubtedly will be taken care of fairly well, because it is human nature to want to work in the limelight where friends can see that the laborers are doing something for their country. Consequently, men will volunteer and get themselves shot, if necessary; but this humdrum work of raising food, and making clothes, is the first requisite, even though it is not nearly so exciting.

That we are short of the necessities of life is due largely to the fact