ABIDING faith in the power

of public opinion is an outstanding characteristic of President Wilson's attitude. Repeatedly the

substance of his diplomatic policy since the war began has consisted of extraordinary appeal not alone to United States public opinion but to international public opinion. This stands out in sharp contrast to the duplicity and secret intrigue by which the world now understands that the Imperial German Government has corrupted peace and fouled

The President, however, even in his war message of April 2, looked beyond war, to a steadfast concert of peace. This, he declared, "can never be maintained except by a partnership of democratic nations.

ingly described by our special correspondent at Washington (pages 457462). Mr. Ackerman, United Press correspondent in Germany, also clearly saw how Europe recognized the force of President Wilson's emphasis upon public opinion as a world power (pages 472-3).

An important contribution to current thought concerning the "Society of Nations of the Future" is made by Secretary-General Alvarez of the American Institute of International Law (page 466).

The idea of establishing an "International Directorate" as the next practicable step in international organization attracts immediate attention. Mr. Snow, who proposes this plan, writes of it for World Court readers on page 474.

Professor John Bassett Moore's article on "International Arbitration" is an authoritative contribution to discussion of this subject.

ABIDING faith in the power

of public opinion is an outstanding characteristic of President Wilson's attitude. Repeatedly the

substance of his diplomatic policy since the war began has consisted of extraordinary appeal not alone to United States public opinion but to international public opinion. This stands out in sharp contrast to the duplicity and secret intrigue by which the world now understands that the Imperial German Government has corrupted peace and fouled war. The President, however, even in his war message of April 2, looked beyond war, to a steadfast concert of peace. This, he declared, "can never be maintained except by a partnership of democratic nations. . . . It must be a league of honor, a partnership of opinion." This international objective of statecraft on the part of both President Wilson and Secretary Lansing is illuminat

ingly described by our special correspondent at Washington (pages 457462). Mr. Ackerman, United Press correspondent in Germany, also clearly saw how Europe recognized the force of President Wilson's emphasis upon public opinion as a world power (pages 472-3).

An important contribution to current thought concerning the "Society of Nations of the Future" is made by Secretary-General Alvarez of the American Institute of International Law (page 466).

The idea of establishing an "International Directorate" as the next practicable step in international organization attracts immediate attention. Mr. Snow, who proposes this plan, writes of it for World Court readers on page 474.

Professor John Bassett Moore's article on "International Arbitration" is an authoritative contribution to discussion of this subject.

GERM

ERMANY now approves the "leading idea" that "in the future the material power of arms must be superseded by the moral power of right." Incidentally, for the future also, "limitations of armament" and "obligatory arbitration for international disputes" are approved. These are words used by the German Chancellor in reply to the Pope's proposals for peace. Such diplomatic endorsement of principles of decent international intercourse by Germany a few years ago would have been hailed the world over as a striking sign of international progress. Coming from Germany now, how meaningless they seem to be. They leave us cold. They carry slight conviction of sincerity anywhere behind them.

They suggest mere camouflage to divert the eyes of the world from German diabolism in this warwitness Belgium, Servia, Armenia, France.

Even lip service to right above might hereafter need not be despised as a current by-product of the raging war, we presume. But at present

four-fifths of the civilized world doesn't believe in taking Germany's word for anything between nations. That is frightful punishment. It is hard to conceive of one more terrible. The pose of victor, strong enough to bargain for peace secretly if so Kaiserdom's purposes may be served, does not alter the fact that international faith in Germany's word has been lost.

Secretary Lansing has recently made public new evidences of the corrupt and ruthless character of German diplomacy. Ambassador von Bernstorff on January 22, 1917, cabled to the Berlin Foreign Office requesting "authority to pay out up to $50,000 in order, as on former occasions, to influence Congress through the organization you know of, which can perhaps prevent war." He also suggested the desirability of a public official German declaration in favor of Ireland in order to gain support of Irish influence for German propaganda in the United States. It is difficult to see how any diplomatic offense could be more infamous.

Preceding this sensational disclosure, Mr. Lansing gave out the text of three despatches sent to the Berlin Foreign Office through the Swedish Legation at Buenos Aires by Count Luxburg, German Charge d'Affaires, in which he advised either sparing certain Argentine ships, if possible, or else sinking them without leaving any traces ("spurlos versenkt"). Here was not only brutal offense against neutral Argentina but misuse of neutral Sweden's Foreign offices as well. Argentina promptly handed passports to the offender thus revealed; Germany disavowed her representative, and a break may be officially averted. But the stain re

mains.

One revelation after another simply corroborates the fact that in

German diplomacy as in German war there is no distinction between fair or foul means, there is only military necessity, which justifies any means to the end sought by the Germany Imperial Government. Clearly Presi

No

dent Wilson has laid down the essential preliminary to any talk of peacemaking by the Pope or anybody else. Let some trustworthy and responsible government whose word is guaranteed by free German people speak.

O man comprehends more than a fraction of this war. None comprehends more than a fraction of any aspect of it, military, economic, human. Comparisons fail. This war is different from other wars. It resolves itself into not merely fightingat-arms, but fighting with every national resource, physical, material, mental and moral. Lord Northcliffe sees the war lengthening ahead because he sees a series of wars in it. Australia conquers New-Guinea; the war in Africa is distinct from war in the Balkans; Italy wars against Austria; and so on. From this point of view no one grand military victory or defeat could conceivably determine the whole war.

To the several nations the war simply becomes a supreme struggle. The president's words to the French Commissioner are true for us: "To the last man, to the last dollar the whole force of the United States is at your service." But this measure of patriotism is not reducible to comprehensible terms. Suppose that within three or four years the United States can furnish fifteen million trained men and provide one hundred billion dollars if necessary to win the The head of the steel corpora

war.

tion makes such an estimate, but the figures are quite beyond the grasp of our minds. The first two billion issue of Liberty Bonds, for example, if placed one on top of another, would, we are told, make a pile more than two miles high. The British Empire, for instance, is said to have seven and one-half million men under arms. Nations are gambling in "unknown quantities" of man and money power.

What must appear from this contest, long or shortened as it may be, is that a militarized state system will not be able to stand against a system freer to use many kinds of power in the modern world. Militarism breeds more militarism, ad infinitum. The great destroyer induces its own destruction. On the other hand, organization of power for creative purposes, grows from strength to strength. Cooperation, not subjugation; hope, not fear; freedom, not coercion; the spirit of builders, not exploiters these are strong forces of democracy. They will outwit and defeat and discredit the decadent military autocracy, which brought on the war. They will lead in the constructive international work of the new world after the war.