in the organization 334,710 Scouts and 87,000 Scout-masters, assistant Scout-masters, and other officials. Every Scout is justified in being proud of the fact that he is an active member of one of the most efficient and useful of the war organizations in the United States.

THE WAR: A WEEK OF WAITING

The long-expected new German offensive had not made its appearance at any one of the points selected by theoretical strategists up to May 21-that is, exactly two full months since the first offensive began. Reports continue to come in that General von Buelow is gathering and drilling an enormous force behind the German fighting lines, and that he or Mackensen may at any time strike in one of at least three directions, with the probability, in most opinions, leaning toward an attack on the line of the Allies somewhat to the south of Arras.

However that may be, in the week under consideration the advantage in the fighting has been on the side of the Allies. One despatch sums this up by saying, "In every recent blow by the Allied troops they have made definite gains. The most notable point scored was by the French troops in Flanders, where on May 20 they advanced along a front of over two miles in the Locre region; that is, at the southwest end of the line between Ypres and Mont Kemmel. This attack was directed toward the lower slopes of Mont Kemmel. It resulted in the penetration of German third-line trenches and the capture of about four hundred prisoners. On the previous day Australian forces struck a similar blow in capturing Ville-sur-Ancre, a village south of Albert. Probably the largest and, it is believed, the most costly to Germany of its airplane raids upon London took place on May 19. The number of machines employed was obviously very large, as it is stated that five squadrons of German airships were in action. At least four of these airplanes were brought down in a battle lasting two and one-half hours, in which anti-aircraft guns and British planes were active. There are reports that three other German airships were destroyed. The casualties were mainly outside of London or in the outer districts of London. Of the thirty-seven people killed, nineteen were women and children; the number of the injured is stated to have been one hundred and sixty-one. In this connection is published, apparently. through official sources, the statement that during ten days before this raid on the western front British airmen brought down one hundred and sixteen German planes, as against a loss of thirty-eight British planes.

General Pershing is now sending regularly signed communiqués about the activities of the American troops abroad. They contain thrilling incidents, some of which show remarkable activity of American airmen in the Toul sector, and others relate individual instances of heroic conduct by American soldiers in thrilling detail. Such an incident was that of two brave colored privates, Johnson and Roberts. They fought twenty Germans in a hand-to-hand encounter, using bayonets and bolos against grenades, "preventing," says General Pershing, "by their bravery the capture of any of our men." General Pershing has also allowed it to be known that American troops are now with the British forces on the Flanders front. It was already known that many Americans were brigaded with the French on the Picardy front. A tragic incident of the week was the death in action of Major Raoul Lufbery, the most successful aviator in the American air service. He was as valiant as he was skillful; seventeen victories stand to his credit. The German plane which defeated Major Lufbery was an enormous, high-powered armored triplane or "air-tank an apparently new kind of air weapon which must be equaled in Allied air production.

A SCHOOL FOR CHAPLAINS

One interesting feature of our army life of which not much has been said in the press is the organization of a School for Chaplains. The first session of this school was held at Fort Monroe, on Old Point Comfort. The future sessions, we believe, are to be held at Fort Hamilton, near New York City. Each session lasts about six weeks.

Lectures are given to the chaplains on international law, military law, and military rules and regulations, and conferences are held under the direction of experienced chaplains on general subjects connected with their work. Chaplain A. A.

Pruden, the commandant of the school, and, we believe, the senior chaplain in the United States Army, has collected funds and erected six well-equipped buildings as recreation centers, which are provided with phonographs, pool tables, small games, a library with periodicals, free stationery, and opportunities for writing. In addition to the special instruction there have been held drills both in marching and in horsemanship-quite necessary, since the efficiency of the chaplain depends in no small measure on his being able to endure fatigue and hardship and to make long marches both on foot and on horseback. It is hardly necessary to add that the school has no theological color, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Jew all being members of the school and sharing equally in its privileges and advantages.

This is the first time that such a school has been organized in connection with the American Army, and we believe it is the first time that such a school has ever been organized in connecwith any army. The necessity for it is apparent, since the duties of the American chaplain are in some important respects widely and for these duties some special equipment and training is surely different from those of the ordinary parish priest or minister,

necessary.

Pictures of Chaplain Pruden and of other chaplain instructors are shown on page 195.

BOOZE OR COAL?

A few weeks ago The Outlook, under the questioning title "Booze or Coal?" reported the fact that a thousand coal operators in a mine at Pittsburgh unanimously asked the United States Government to close saloons within a radius of five miles of each mine. These operators believed that it was impossible to get full production from the mines unless a stop were put to drinking by the miners. Other significant facts and records from the coal-mining districts were reported in connec tion with this action. The conclusion was drawn that this situa tion as regards drink among the miners, who are now making larger wages than ever before, could best be straightened out by establishing dry zones about mining centers, just as dry zones have been established in places where soldiers in large numbers have been stationed.

A friend of The Outlook, a man of ability and special knowledge in manufacturing affairs, in a personal letter doubts whether the "booze" has very seriously interfered with the coal output. He points out that the production of coal in the year 1917 was many thousands of tons larger than in any previ ous year, and calls our attention to news reports and comments which show that the shortage in cars has prevented the increase in product from being even greater than it was. The car-supply question and difficult industrial problems between working miners and the companies seem, in his judgment, to give the real reason why production and distribution did, not increase still more and are not now equal to the enormous demand for supplies, especially in the manufacture of war material.

pos

There are pertinence and force in this statement. We have never supposed that the drink question was the only one involved. But under the present circumstances we must not think of past years, but rather think of one hundred per cent of sible production for the future. In other words, our criterion is not what was done, but what could and should have been done. If "booze" had not interfered, far larger quantities of coal could have been mined.

The importance of this question is just as great to-day as it was last year-in point of fact, it may be greater. Statements that come from the Fuel Administration and from other sources indicate that a danger of a shortage in coal next fall is far from negligible. The facts quoted in our former article show beyond dispute that one of the things that keeps production down is drinking. Take, for instance, one company's records of one hundred employees, half of whom were drinkers and half of whom were not. The first lost eight days a month each on the average; the others, less than one day.

A valued correspondent who has made a special investigation of the actual situation writes to us:

The objection is raised that coal cannot be mined without the cars to ship it away in. I can see no reason why coal piles as well as culm banks should not rear their heads in the coal regions. If cars are wanting, let the mine operators plan a system by which the coal can be mined and stored on the surface. Unques

tionably it can be done. If the mines were run to capacity and all miners worked to capacity, we should be astonished at the output. It would far exceed any output yet seen-even that of 1917.

If booze does not interfere with coal production, why do mine operators take the trouble to go to court and to fight booze as strenuously as they are now doing?

Here is a newspaper item dated October 18, 1917: "Steps were taken to-day by leading manufacturers of munitions and by coal operators of the Pittsburgh district to have the Federal Government create dry zones in the vicinity of their plants and mines. The Bessemer Coal and Coke Company, the Superior Fuel Company, and the Ford Colliery Company said that the operating efficiency of their mines has been lowered two thousand tons a day on account of illegal drinking places."

Another is dated November 5, 1917. It is from Shamokin : "The Susquehanna Collieries Company, which recently took over the Pennsylvania Collieries Company, between this city and Mount Carmel, to-day started a campaign against intoxicating beverages being delivered in its mining villages.... The company declares it will prosecute all who tempt its employees by offering drink in wholesale quantities. . . It is understood that the Reading Coal and Iron Company will issue a similar order."

Wherever the experiment of barring booze from workers has been tried the improvement in output, be it of whatever sort it may, has been so marked that there is no room for argument as to the detrimental effect of booze. And the mine operators find the same result.

I

AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION

T is significant that the first exercise by the President of the powers granted to him by the Overman Law is his reorganization of the air service. By executive order the President has taken from the Signal Corps of the Army the task of producing airplanes, and has assigned it to a newly created Bureau of Aircraft Production under the Director of Aircraft Production, Mr. John D. Ryan. This action, we may be sure, is the result of the dissatisfaction of the country with the progress of our air programme; and it is only one of two steps which the President has taken to allay that dissatisfaction and to undertake a remedy for its causes. The other step was the appointment of his political opponent in the last Presidential election, Charles E. Hughes, to act with the Attorney-General of the United States in making an investigation of the "very serious charges of dishonesty " which "have been made in connection with the production of aircraft."

Both these actions on the part of the President are plainly welcome to the whole country. The appointment of Mr. Hughes came first, and was hailed with expressions of delight and with praise.

The significance of this twofold action on the part of the President can be made clear, perhaps, by a brief review of what has happened in the plans for aircraft production during the past year.

Early in the summer of last year the Aircraft Production Board (a branch of the Council of National Defense, and therefore a body to make plans, not to exercise authority) had drawn up a programme for producing aircraft. It arranged for the building of airplane training camps, an immense task; it made estimates as to the financial needs, and it worked out a programme for the manufacture of planes and motors. Since airplanes are bulky, it planned to devote the building of airplanes mainly to training planes to be used in this country, and to provide for the building of fighting planes out of American material by American workmen in France, because it was believed that there would be a more economical use of tonnage in the export of raw material and men than in the export of finished planes. It also recognized that American manufacturers were specialists in quantity production, but that the airplanes in use abroad were not designed for manufacture by quantity production but by careful hand labor; and it therefore undertook the designing of a motor that could be standardized and made in quantities. For this purpose it assembled a number of motor engineers, who worked out, or rather undertook to work out, this United States Motor, or Liberty Motor, as it came to be called.

Such plans as the Aircraft Production Board, under the

chairmanship of Mr. Howard Coffin, drew up involve infinite details and are liable to unexpected delay. Apparently no adequate provision was made to supply deficiencies caused by such delays. Even before winter set in there were rumors of unexpected obstacles encountered. A year ago in April and June The Outlook printed articles which forecast some of the problems that the Government does not seem to have foreseen. In January of this year there was reason for much concern, and The Outlook printed an editorial with the title "Is All Well with Our Airplane Programme?" The trouble has been in the development of the Liberty Motor. The development of it has been hampered by red tape. Hundreds of changes in the plans and specifications have been made during the manufacture of parts for the motor. Many of these changes have been in the nature of refinements which some experts believe wholly unnecessary. Whatever the causes of the delay have been, however, there is no question that there has been delay, and that it ought to have been provided against. In the meantime our Government has failed to provide other motors which could be used until the Liberty Motor was proved to be a success. In the article by Mr. Driggs of June 27, 1917, it was pointed out that the HispanoSuize motor of the French airplane known as the Spad was available for our use, was highly successful, and could be used to start with. Again, in January of this year, The Outlook editorially urged the necessity of making in large numbers motors that could be made at once. There were then, and still are, factories in this country making airplane motors for our allies, and all that was needed was to assure those factories that the United States Government would take sufficient quantities of their motors to justify the enlargement of their plants. Now we understand orders have been given which ought to have been given months ago,

At such a time as this, when there has been failure, the natural inclination is to cry, Fraud. Against the men engaged in our aircraft production plans there have been raised by Mr. Borglum and others accusations of dishonesty, selfishness, greed. We think the country values as it should the unselfishness and patriotism of men who have been rendering absolutely essential service with inadequate and in some instances no compensation. In such a vast undertaking there may have been individuals engaged who were greedy and selfish, and perhaps a few who have been dishonest. The real cause of the delay, however, has been, we are convinced, not primarily dishonesty, but incompetence. The failure has been the failure of men over-optimistic, too sure of themselves, too ready to take chances, too much engrossed in their own plans, and too little inclined to make provision against failure or delay. They have too much aimed at perfection, and, missing perfection, they have reached nothing. Like General Gough in northern France, they have been so sure of their first line that they have not prepared their third line of defense.

It is highly desirable to unearth dishonesty and to punish fraud. The appointment of Mr. Hughes and his acceptance of that appointment is an assurance that the process of searching for dishonesty will be thorough. But that is not enough. And the Senate of the United States knows that that is not enough. It is for that reason that Senators have been considering a resolution to empower the Military Affairs Committee to make a thorough investigation of the aircraft situation in order to find out what has been holding up aircraft production; for it is not merely dishonesty that we want to rid ourselves of, but incompetence. And, what is more, Congress, which provides money, has the right to know how efficiently money has been expended. Against this inquiry the President has set his face. We are sorry that he has not welcomed 1.. + is to his interest that his Administration should be relieved of the encumbrance of incompetents; and it cannot be relieved of them unless they are discovered. He has taken very necessary action in reorganizing aircraft production and putting it under the charge of a tested executive. We think it would have been still wiser if he had been willing to supplement that action with action co-operating with the Senate Committee on Military Affairs in getting at the truth.

Not for many weeks have we felt so hopeful about this country's aircraft production as we do to-day. There has been improvement already. And if the President were co-operating with the Senate, there would be nothing to mar the record which he

has made by concentrating authority in a responsible Director of Aircraft Production.

one as remote from true civilization as the other than Guizot has portrayed that contrast in these anticipatory portraits drawn nearly a century ago.

A state in which “ every man does very nearly just what he

What do we mean by civilization?

François Guizot in his "History of Civilization," which is a recognized classic in historical literature, answers this question. A scientific definition, he truly says, is insufficient. To understand what man means by civilization we must study the history of man. With great artistic skill he causes pictures of certain states of society as they have existed in the world's history to pass in rapid review before the reader. These historic miniatures, not of man but of social states, are marvels of graphic portraiture. From them he educes the meaning of civilization as it is understood by the common sense of mankind; for "it is common sense which gives to words their ordinary significance, and common sense is the characteristic of humanity." The meaning of civilization is comprised in two statements. Civilization involves progress, development; it presents the idea of a people marching onward, not to change their place, but to change their condition. And this progress, this development, "is the perfection of civilized life, the development of society, properly so called, of the relations of men among themselves.' But this is not all. The human species is something more than a mere anthill in which all that is required is order and physical happiness. Civilization also includes the development of the individual man himself, of his faculties, his sentiments, his ideas. Civilization "is the progress of society and the progress of humanity."

Of these two, the progress of the individual is the more important, because it is the ultimate end of civilization. "Human societies are born, live, and die, on the earth; it is there their destinies are accomplished.. But they contain not the whole man. After he has engaged himself to society, there remains to him the noblest part of himself, those high faculties by which he elevates himself to God, to a future life, to unknown felicity in an invisible world. . We, persons individual and identical, veritable beings endowed with immortality, we have a different destiny from that of states."

This analysis and description of civilization is, as we have said, derived from and based on miniature portraits of certain states of society which have been seen in the history of the world and to which the common sense of humanity has refused the title civilization. Two of these miniatures are the following: First, suppose a people whose external life is easy, is full of physical comfort; they pay few taxes, they are free from suffering; justice is well administered in their private relations—in a word, material existence is for them altogether happy, and happily regulated. But at the same time the intellectual and moral existence of this people is studiously kept in a state of torpor and inactivity; of, I will not say oppression, for they do not understand the feeling, but of compression. We are not without instances of this state of things. There has been a great number of small aristocratic republics in which the people have been thus treated like flocks of sheep, well kept and materially happy, but without moral and intellectual activity. Is this civilization? Is this a people civilizing itself?

I take a fourth and last hypothesis: the liberty of each individual is very great, inequality among them is rare, and, at all events, very transient. Every man does very nearly just what he pleases, and differs little in power from his neighbor; but there are very few general interests, very few public ideas, very little society-in a word, the faculties and existence of individuals appear and then pass away wholly apart and without acting upon each other, or leaving any trace behind them; the successive generations leave society at the same point at which they found it; this is the state of savage tribes; liberty and equality are there, but assuredly not civilization.

The first of these miniatures is so accurate a picture of Germany, the second of Russia, that we might suppose them to be photographs taken during the last few months of existing states sitting unconsciously for their portraits, did we not know that Guizot's lectures were delivered in Paris in the years 1828, 1829, and 1830. It would indeed be difficult for any writer today to portray more clearly and effectively the contrast between the Socialism of Germany and the individualism of Russia-the

are very few general interests, very few public ideas, very little system," is an accurate description of the Bolsheviki idea of liberty; how quickly such liberty generates irresponsible despotism the recent history of Russia once more illustrates, as it often has been illustrated by past history.

Not less accurate is Guizot's prophetic description of Germany. It is true that the German people do not pay few taxes; but their external life is easy, their material existence is happily regulated for them by their masters; the common people are treated like flocks of sheep, well kept and materially happy, but without moral and intellectual activity. Material existence, happily regulated for the people by their masters, constitutes the German idea of the state; it not only regulates their social conduct, but also determines their opinions and furnishes their moral law. To see a people treated like flocks of sheep, well kept and materially happy but without moral and intellectual activity, inspires in the hearts of the German at home a curiously naïve self-conceit and in the hearts of pro-Germans abroad an equally naïve admiration of German efficiency. But if Guizot is right, neither the order of Germany without liberty nor the liberty of Russia without order is entitled to be called civilization.

The present war is waged by the Allies to protect civilization from assault by an uncivilized state. It is quite in harmony with the character of that state that it conducts its campaign against Belgium and France in 1918 in the spirit in which the Kaiser in 1900 directed his troops to conduct their campaign against China: "As soon as you come to blows with the enemy he will be beaten. No mercy will be shown. No prisoners will be taken. As the Huns, under King Attila, made a name for themselves which is still mighty in traditions and legends today, may the name of German be so fixed in China by your deeds that no Chinese shall ever again dare even to look at a German askance !"

CONCERNING A MAN WHO FLED TO PATAGONIA

"The President of the Argentine

Has gone to Patagonia.'

It sounds like the latest hit on Broadway. But it was nothing of the sort. It was a sober news item on the front page, telling how the President of the Argentine had temporarily deposited the state seal and all the other cares of office on the head of the Vice-President of the Argentine and set sail upon the blue Atlantic, bound south.

"The President of the Argentine has gone to Patagonia.

The Happy Eremite read it and grinned. Then he read it again, to make sure that it wasn't a joke. There it was, with a date line and all, a sober cable message among tales of moving accidents by flood and field, the sinking of an Austrian battleship, a notable speech by Balfour, troubles in Ireland, troubles in aircraft, groans from Picardy, howls of disillusionment from Russia: "The President of the Argentine has gone to Patagonia.'

The grin of the Happy Eremite expanded into a long chuckle of sheer delight. "Lucky devil!" he murmured. "Who wouldn't if he had the chance?"

For it happened that to the Happy Eremite Patagonia was not a geographical fact at all, but a mythical land beyond the farthest rim of the farthest sea; the jumping-off place where men's heads do grow beneath their shoulders and, according to the German phrase, “cats and dogs say good-night;" a land of mists and enormous terrors and here and there hidden glades where the apples of the Hesperides grow.

The President of the Argentine had gone to Patagonia! Perhaps in the Argentine politics were hot and the Opposition was saying unbearable things. Perhaps in the Argentine there were yellow journals making scathing remarks. Perhaps in the Argentine there were preparedness orators and pacifists on

every street corner and German propagandists in every newspaper office. Perhaps in the Argentine there was some envoy most extraordinary, successor to Luxburg, making life miserable for a frantic Executive. Under those circumstances, mused the Happy Eremite, a President of the Argentine might look with longing eyes toward Patagonia.

Ör, he mused, perhaps there were none of these things in the Argentine. Perhaps there was only the daily flood of terrifying, heart-breaking news from Picardy and Flanders, the cold and succinct despatches, the little tales of heroism like sudden flashes out of pitch-blackness, the benumbing accounts of unspeakable agony and need.

Good God, why wouldn't a man want to go to Patagonia! The Happy Eremite wondered hungrily how much the fare was. And then suddenly it occurred to him that he had heard of the President of the Argentine before. He was, he had read somewhere, it seems, one of the few men living who, standing unhampered, with no pistol at his breast, between the forces of despotism and the forces of liberty, free to choose his side, had chosen to choose neither-and to be neutral.

That, said the Happy Eremite to himself, decided the meaning of that mysterious voyage of the President of the Argentine to Patagonia.

The President of the Argentine probably knew what he was about. It was not at all improbable, thought the Happy Eremite, that Patagonia was the only comfortable place left in the world for a neutral.

GERMANY AN ECONOMIC OUTLAW

The "Journal of Commerce," published daily in New York City, is one of the ablest commercial journals printed anywhere in the English language. It is conservative without being reactionary, liberal without being lunatic, wise without being highbrow, and international without being impractical. When it says deliberately that no decent or intelligent American can do business with the present German Government, or with the German people so long as they sustain that Government, the assertion means something more than mere idealism. This is the ground the "Journal of Commerce" takes in an editorial entitled "Germany's Deferred Repentance," which it printed in its issue of May 17. It is a view which we think every wise American business man should understand and hold as his own. We are therefore glad to print the editorial entire in our own editorial pages, as one of the best statements we have seen in so small a compass of the economic policy which the American people should pursue towards the Hohenzollern dynasty and its followers.-THE EDITORS.

It must be accepted as evidence of returning sanity among the German people that the discussion of the business conditions to be faced after the war should be taking the place of talk about the terms of a German-made peace. For in the economic discussion there is at least a tacit admission that Germany may not be able to dictate the terms on which peace will be re-established, and that on her success in recovering the commercial good will of her present enemies must largely depend the prospects for the rehabilitation of her trade. But the disillusionment, even of the business men and the economists, is only partial. For example, into the outlook of all of them there enters the certainty not only of a return to Germany of her lost colonies, but the acquisition of more. Now, if there be one outcome of the war more certain than another, it is that Germany will not be allowed to renew the reign of terror she had established in her South African and Polynesian colonies. No blacker page of history has ever been written than that which records the German treatment of Herreros, Akwas, and South Sea Islanders. As an outlet for emigration the German colonies hardly figured at all. Germany's object in colonization was merely to do a profitable business; and there would have been no complaint had this end been pursued justly and equitably. But "frightfulness" was persistently employed as the weapon to subjugate and despoil the native races, and the men sent to wield it were mostly failures at home or of plainly disreputable character. A courageous German, Dr. Schaedler, speaking in 1906, called

the story of the colonies one of "embezzlements, falsehoods sensual cruelties, assaults on women, horrible ill treatment," and he added that "officials and officers who stink materially and morally are no good to us in the colonies, not even if they were royal princes." When the Herreros, goaded beyond endurance, turned on their oppressors, the retribution dealt out to them made their country one vast graveyard. Thousands, driven into barren waterless regions, perished of hunger and thirst. The rest, when they did not escape into British territory, were made prisoners, and were either forced to labor or were kept together in prison camps, where the death rate was appalling. It is reckoned that only some 20,000 Herreros remained out of 80,000 after the atrocities of the Herrero War.

Humanity has stood aghast before the revelations of German cruelty and bestiality in dealing with native races whose lives the nation held in trust, and the people who tolerated these misdeeds will never be given a chance to repeat the experiment. As for the commercial confidence about whose renewal the Teutoe world is showing some natural nervousness, that is in Germany's own hands. First, her people must make up their minds in what voice they are to address the rest of the world. Shall it be, for example, in that of Baron von Freytag-Loringhoven, the deputy chief of the German Imperial Staff, whose "Deductions from the World War," written for home consumption, has recently been published abroad? If so, it must be concluded that the experience of the war has taught Germany nothing, and that she will face the years of peace obstinately clinging to such prepossessions as these: "We misconstrue reality if we imagine that it is possible to rid the world of war by means of mutual agreements. The ideal of a state coextensive with humanity is no ideal at all.. As regards us Germans, the World War should disencumber us once and for all of any vague cosmopolitan sentimentality. If our enemies, both our secret and our avowed enemies, make professions of this nature, that is for us sufficient evidence of the hypocrisy which underlies them. In the future, as in the past, the

German people will have to seek firm cohesion in its glorious army and in its belaureled young fleet." If the expressed convictions of economists like Professor von Schulze-Gaevernitz are to be interpreted in terms of declarations like these, they will not carry much weight either in or out of Germany. It is quite true, as the professor avows, that nothing has so estranged the world from his countrymen as the system of government they have maintained up to this time. It is equally certain that in this system of government has lain rooted the lack of sympathy and the mistrust which the German trader has had to meet everywhere. But the distrust can only be accentuated, and the lack of sympathy become more profound, if, in the face of the lessons of the war, the system is to remain unchanged and its spirit is to be perpetuated.

Then, surely, the pessimistic view of Germany's enemies will have to be accepted as the truth, namely, that the militarist party will go on fighting till the German people stop them, and when the fighting has been stopped the German people will begin building militarism up again, because it is the only form of life they know and the only form of government they deserve. The obvious corollary to a line of argument like that, which Germans alone can invalidate, is that unless the door is barred ruthlessly to the whole German nation, every country closed to its trade and every sea to its commerce, the whole bloody business will have to be enacted over again in the course of twenty years. Whether this be truth or not depends primarily upon the acceptance or rejection of such generalizations as those of Baron von Freytag-Loringhoven about the grandeur and sublimity of the soldier's calling and the necessity of making it the keystone of the German Empire. Obviously, against an empire saturated with a spirit like this all the economic weapons which the Allies possess would have to be used without scruple. That is to say, there would have to be a concerted effort to deprive the German manufacturer of his raw material and to exclude German products from foreign markets. It must depend altogether on the kind of challenge which the German people address to the Allied world, whether the latter is found banded together to make them as uncomfortable as possible by way of convincing them that the rest of civilized mankind will not endure the false idols they worship.

N

"O one can accuse the leaders of the League to Enforce Peace of being jingoes. Ex-President Taft, Judge Alton B. Parker, President Lowell, of Harvard, Öscar S. Straus, Anna Howard Shaw, cannot by any malice be misrepresented as fire-eaters. Some of the people who have associated themselves with this League have been so pronounced in their views of the evils of war that they have been termed pacifists, and a few have in times past glorified pacifism. If Germany has any doubts as to whether this Nation is in this war to a finish, she will have occasion to rue her error; for this League of peace-lovers have held in the city of Philadelphia, historically associated with the Quakers, a Convention which must have made the Kaiser's ears tingle. There was just one thing that the people who attended that Convention were hungry for, and that was for an expression that adequately voiced their determination that this war be fought to the kind of victory that St. George had over the dragon. The delegates took an intelligent interest in discussions of programmes and methods; but when a master of language excoriated the Kaiser and his gang, or denounced the butcheries committed by the Germans, or praised the gallantry and bravery of the men who are laying down their lives in the battle against the Hun, or pronounced the fate in store for the bandits of Europe, or raised a warning for all rulers to hear of the wrath that would fall upon them if they so much as thought of the possibility of an inconclusive peace, those delegates went wild.

There were three or four pacifists discernible in the crowds of the hotel corridor where the delegates gathered, but they looked uncomfortable. They reminded one of the pro-German propagandists that fringed the crowds at the political conventions two years ago; but these pacifists seemed rather more lonely and out of place. What they were doing there is hard to imagine, unless they thought they could get in their work through some committee or other. If they thought that, they certainly were even more uncomfortable at the end than they were at the beginning. There were many demonstrations of the war spirit of these delegates. A dramatic incident was that which a correspondent of the Philadelphia "North American," Janet Stewart, described as follows:

Dr. Lyman Abbott, white-bearded, venerable, and solemn, threw into the midst of the League to Enforce Peace at last night's session the most burning righteous and relentless profession of wrath a Christian minister has probably ever made.

"The Archbishop of York has told us," and the warning right arm was lifted high above the heads of the audience," has told us that we must pray for our enemies, even as Christ on his cross asked of the Father that he forgive his murderers, 'for they know not what they do.'

"Yes, for the Roman soldiers who carried out the orders of the Roman Pilate and the Jewish Caiaphas; the unwitting instru ments of witting knaves; but he did not pray for Caiaphas, he did not pray for Judas, he did not pray for Pilate.

"I would offer up that prayer for ignorant and unwitting criminals; I would not offer it for the Kaiser or for his pals! "I may be tempted to lie to my fellow-men, but I will not lie to my God.

66

Any man who proposes a compromise with Germany or a peace negotiation with this band of brigands is a traitor!"

They had risen to greet him when he was introduced, risen with applause and clappings; they rose to do him honor when he ended, and they rose with shouts of gratitude and approval. The speech which is generally acknowledged to have been received with the most frequent demonstrations of approval was that by Rabbi Wise, described in a newspaper caption as a "Rabbinical Whirlwind." This man has always been recognized as an influence in international peace movements; but there was no room in the minds of his hearers while he was speaking for the idea of any other kind of peace than that secured by an overwhelming victory--a victory that would make Alsace-Lorraine, Armenia, and Russia free. And his audience gave way to their enthusiasm when he said: "We will never, never, never pay a tithe of the debt we owe to England and to France. We are going to be allies with England in the coming peace as we are in the present war."

...

As was indicated by the welcome given to this last sentence, these delegates were enthusiastic for winning the war because of what victory promised to the liberty and the union of the free peoples of the world. It was a natural error on the part of a workingman in overalls who, while engaged on a job in one of the hotels in which delegates were lodged, remarked to a bell-boy: "What is this League to Enforce Peace? Ain't that what the Kaiser wants to do?" That might be a natural inference from the title of the League, and even from the slogan which appeared on the Convention posters: "Win the War for Permanent Peace." But it is an error because really what the delegates demanded was not peace first, but liberty. In all the speeches the emphasis was laid on common defense of the right of free peoples to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi

ness.

It was made clear time and time again that the only league of nations possible is that composed of nations that have a common ideal. What these delegates had their minds on was something abhorrent to the Kaiser-a league of friendship to secure liberty. That is why, when Ambassador Jusserand rose to speak at the dinner which closed the Convention, the delegates rose too; and that is why they cheered him as he brought his indictment against the atrocious Germans, because what those Germans have been doing has been aimed at what America holds dear as well as France. This is what Mr. Herbert S. Houston meant when he said that a league of nations was a war measure. This is what Oscar S. Straus meant when he declared that in the trenches our soldiers and the soldiers of our allies had already formed the league.

And the voice of labor was heard in the Convention testifying to this common ideal. On the next page the statement read by Mr. Voll on behalf of the American Federation of Labor and the American Alliance for Labor and Democracy is printed. That was one case in which labor's voice was heard. Another was the speech of Mr. Winfield R. Gaylord. It was he who said he had been asked to speak on labor's attitude to this war, and replied: "We have no attitude to this war-it is our war;" and when the applause died down he continued: "That is so solemn a fact that people are afraid of it. . . . When the Kaiser and the Turk challenged democracy, Labor said, 'They challenge us.'

We'll win the war-all of us together. Peace between the nations is not the end for which we are fighting. We are fighting for life." It is this ideal of liberty, as Mr. Gaylord suggested, the very life of free peoples, that was repeatedly set forth as the basis of the international league now fighting against Germany and hereafter to continue.

Among the most thoughtful statements of the problems with which the free peoples of the earth will have to deal was the address of Mr. William English Walling. He pointed out that Germany's war was not merely a military war but an economic war, a commercial war, as well. He pointed out that Germany had deliberately undertaken to impoverish France and Russia, with the view not merely to the winning of victory, but to the subjection of those countries to her will for years and years to come; and he made it clear that even if the Hohenzollerns should to-morrow be dethroned there would be no safeguard against German domination, for a German Socialist State intent on the same ends that the Hohenzollerns have in view would be no less dangerous than Prussia is to-day, and that even with Germany democratized the impoverishment which Germany has inflicted already on France and Russia and other countries, an impoverishment from which it is impossible for them to recover for many years to come, would insure an advantage to Germany and would be a real reward to her for her past crimes. This warning of the need of economic defense of free peoples, a warning that comes from a man known as a radical, expresses from one point of view what is expressed from quite a different point of view in the statement from the “Journal of Commerce printed on another page.

So, from first to last, the thoughts of this Convention were set on victory, and a victory not merely of our own arms, but a victory of the arms of our allies and of the liberties which those arms have been defending. With that determination for victory