regret at reading the current issue of your CREATED BY BERKEY & GAY

to whether she shall resume sovereignty Subscribers

M

eto

கு

FINE SILVERWARE

WEALTH is not the only road to the beautiful.
Appreciation comes first.

You may not be able to afford a Raphael or a Corot
but you can begin to collect fine silverware, and if it is
Gorham Sterling Silverware

it need not be costly to be beautiful, for The Gorham
Company excels in creating artistic silverware whether
the cost be little or much.

Moreover, you can assemble

Gorham Sterling Silverware

a piece at a time even in the most inexpensive de-
signs, enriching your home permanently, and stimula
ting your artistic faculties to further acquisitions of
companion pieces.

Gorham Sterling Silverware
is sold by leading jewelers everywhere
and bears this trade-mark

FFR 2318

The Outlook

FEBRUARY 20, 1918

Offices, 381 Fourth Avenue, New York

On account of the war and the consequent delays in the mails, both in New York City and on the railways, this copy of
The Outlook may reach the subscriber late. The publishers are doing everything in their power to facilitate deliveries

POLITICAL ASPECTS OF PEACE

The two important news events of last week regarding the political side of the war were the announcement by despatches from Russia that the Bolsheviki have declared that the state of war between Russia on the one side and the Central Powers on the other is at an end, and a restatement by President Wilson in a personal address to the two houses of Congress of the bases which may underlie negotiations for peace.

The news from the Bolsheviki adds little of importance to what was already known in this country except that the Bolsheviki Government now officially announces that the Russian army on all fronts is to be demobilized. While the despatches say that a state of war no longer exists, they also announce that no formal treaty of peace will be signed. The confusion of such a situation as this must be apparent to the simplest minds. It is merely confirmatory of the fact long realized in this country that under present conditions Russia can no more be counted upon as a military factor in this war. The Bolsheviki Government is more and more exposing the Russian people to German military and political domination if Germany wishes to exercise such domination.

This disintegration of Russia may be defined in two wordsunconditional surrender.

WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAID

The President's statement to Congress makes an emphatic distinction between the attitude of Germany and that of Austria. In the present attitude of the masters of Germany he sees no basis on which to reach a peace" worth the infinite sacrifice of these years of tragic suffering." He particularly declares that the German insistence on settling Russian questions with Russia alone and French questions with France alone is impossible, and that "all parties in this war must join in the settlement of every issue anywhere involved in it; because what we are seeking is a peace that we can all unite to guarantee and maintain, and every item of it must be submitted to the common judg ment whether it be right and fair, an act of justice, rather than a bargain between sovereignties." In the attitude of Austria, as expressed by Count Czernin, he sees a spirit different from that of Germany. In particular, Count Czernin's concession of an independent Poland, of the evacuation and restoration of Belgium, and of the satisfaction of national aspirations even within Austria, the President cites as evidence of this different spirit. With respect to Austria he says, therefore:

After all, the test of whether it is possible for either Government to go any further in this comparison of views is simple and obvious. The principles to be applied are these:

1. That each part of the final settlement must be based upon the essential justice of that particular case and upon such adjustments as are most likely to bring a peace that will be per

manent.

2. That peoples and provinces are not to be bartered about from sovereignty to sovereignty as if they were mere chattels in a game, even the great game, now forever discredited, of the balance of power; but that

and

pawns

3. Every territorial settlement involved in this war must be made in the interest and for the benefit of the populations concerned, and not as a part of any mere adjustment or compromise of claims amongst rival states; and

4. That all well-defined national aspirations shall be accorded the utmost satisfaction that can be accorded them without introducing new or perpetuating old elements of discord and antago

nism that would be likely in time to break the peace of Europe, and consequently of the world.

A general peace erected upon such foundations can be discussed. Until such a peace can be secured we have no choice but to go on.

If this statement appears to indicate more than in his preceding address that the President foresees the possibility of a settlement of the war by negotiation, it must be kept in mind that he refers specifically to Austria, and that in conclusion he reasserts the determination of America not to turn back from a course chosen upon principle. He still sees Germany in the control of a party "apparently willing and able to send millions of men to their death to prevent what all the world now sees to be just." He declares that we shall not pause till our resources are "mobilized in their entirety;" and that "our whole strength will be put into this war of emancipation."

A PAPER PEACE FOR THE UKRAINE

Readers of newspaper headlines who do not read the cable despatches beneath the headlines may well be confused by reading one day that the Red Guard of the Bolsheviki have" сарtured" Kiev in the Ukraine, and another day that the Ukraine has, against the will of the Bolsheviki, concluded a separate peace with Germany. In both cases the achievement is what may be called a paper achievement. It sounds much more important than it is. Thus, as regards Kiev, a study of the facts shows that the so-called capture was not a military act, but the gain by the Bolsheviki party of political supremacy. Whether the supremacy is permanent or not time will show. The great Province of the Ukraine, in southern Russia, has a population of over 20,000,000 people.

As regards the peace with Germany, what has happened is that the Rada, or Parliament, of the Ukraine has agreed upon terms with Germany. Again it remains to be seen whether this is a permanent thing. Whether peace becomes effective or not depends on the result of what is practically civil war now going on throughout the Ukraine between the forces of the Bolsheviki and those Ukrainians who in large numbers wish total independence, relief from the rule of the Bolsheviki, and peace at

once.

The Austrian Prime Minister, Count Czernin, has declared that peace with the Ukraine is more valuable to the Central Powers than peace with Petrograd. His reason is, as reported, that large quantities of food can be obtained by the Central Powers from the Ukraine, while Petrograd "has nothing but revolution and anarchy to export." Even from an enemy's tongue this sentence should illuminate the minds of Lenine and Trotsky.

The Rada now in session was elected long before the Lenine Government came into power in Petrograd, and after that event it lost little time in declaring its independence of the new Petrograd régime, which in turn has denounced the Rada as a reprehensible bourgeois body- a body dominated by citizens of middle rank. The majority of the Ukrainians are fundamentally opposed to the immediate redistribution of land among the peasants, which the Bolsheviki make the corner-stone of their political religion. The vast size and large population of the Ukraine make its entire separation from Petrograd control and a separate peace important. Theoretically, the Bolsheviki ought to rejoice at Ukraine independence in accordance with their talk about the rights of smaller countries. Practically, this independence is a thorn in the side of the

273

Bolsheviki Government, which is really based, not on democ- Munitions Directorship Bills; that it was really intended to racy, but on absolutism-not of a Czar, but of the proletariat, result in a compromise. and the proletariat exclusively.

66

It was in Berlin and Vienna that, as the despatches say, joy bells were rung over the conclusion of this separate peace. Apart from the food possibilities for the Central Powers, Germany and Austria recognize that such a peace would put Rumania in a dangerous situation. It is not surprising that, almost simultaneously with the announcement of peace between the Central Powers and the Ukraine, Rumania received an ultimatum from General von Mackensen giving her only four days in which to begin negotiations for peace, with implied threats of German occupation of the portion of Rumania still held by the Rumanians.

THE PRESIDENT'S BILL

Senator Overman has introduced into the United States Senate a bill authorizing the President "to co-ordinate and consolidate" the executive bureaus, agencies, and offices "in the interest of economy and the more effective administration of the Government." It would empower the President "to make such redistribution of functions among executive agencies as he may deem necessary, including any functions, duties, and powers hitherto by law conferred upon any executive department, commission, bureau, agency, office, or officer;" he may also "make such regulations and issue such orders as he may deem necessary;" he may "transfer any duties or powers from one existing department, commission, bureau," etc., to another, and "the personnel, property and moneys appropriated as well;" finally, "all restrictions in any existing law" shall be suspended. The bill would remain in force during the war and one year thereafter.

Under it the President might abolish all the Government's war-making machinery, with or without creating any new machinery in its place. It would enable the President to repeal the laws by which Governmental departments and agencies have been established, and would further emphasize the legislation which has already given unprecedented power to the President in his present control over food, fuel, transportation by land and by sea, commerce, censorship, alien property, espionage, embargo. We comment on this bill on page 279.

WHAT PEOPLE SAY

A newspaper of great influence, and generally an Adminis tration supporter, the New York "Times," reflects the wellnigh universal comment on the Overman Bill in protesting that the President, instead of having his personal powers extended, should summon the ablest executives without respect to party, The Springfield" Republican," on the other hand, says that the Overman bill would "simplify, while unifying and co-ordinating, the executive machinery; it does not thrust into the Adminis tration system an entirely new and unprecedented body, such as the War Cabinet." From the opposite coast comes the assertion of the San Francisco "Chronicle" that Congress has no power to "create any war tribunal to which the President is bound to pay any attention even if Congress should pass it over his veto." The New York" World," which takes this view of the proposed War Cabinet, disapproves at the same time the proposal that the President be given authority to reframe the executive departments to suit himself.

The newspapers would indicate that there is difference of opinion in the South as elsewhere. The New Orleans "TimesPicayune" says: "In street cars, as in the Senate, are delivered judgments so pragmatic that they ought to come from the lips of nobody but a Cæsar, a Hannibal, a Napoleon, or a Joffre. If these wiseacres know what they are talking about, Woodrow Wilson should be ejected from the White House, and a war council composed of their kind should be put in his place."

The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. On that body will devolve the decision to report the bill out or allow it to sleep in committee. Mr. Overman is the Committee's ranking Democratic (majority) member.

Other Senators and other newspapers, however, have sug gested that the President, finally realizing that complete Gov ernmental organization was essential, had determined on it, but, in the language of the Omaha "Bee,' "" does not want to share with Congress any of the work of directing the war."

Some papers and some Senators feel that the measure was intended not so much of something to be passed as something drastic enough to head off the Chamberlain War Council and

In conclusion, both sides agree that closer co-operation and better control must be secured.

DEFENDING THE PRESIDENT

Criticism of the Administration's conduct of the war has evoked several addresses of vigorous defense.

The most comprehensive of these was delivered by Represent ative Carter Glass in Congress on February 6. On the princi ple that the best defense is an offense, Mr. Glass devoted a part of his speech to a counter-criticism of the man who has come to be regarded as the chief spokesman of the critics-the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, Mr. Chamberlain, of Oregon. He made it a point to refer to the course of the Committee on Military Affairs before the war in cutting down appropriations which had been recommended by military authorities and in failing to secure in time of peace the reorganization which now the Chairman of that Committee regards as essential. Mr. Glass attributed a large part of the conditions of unpreparedness to Mr. Chamberlain's own failure of foresight. The most effective part of his speech, however, was not that in which he said virtually "You're another," but that in which he gave detailed explanation of certain courses which had been criticised.

As to ordnance, Mr. Glass declared that it was the deliberate policy of the Government, with the approval of French authorities, to arm our men sent to France from "her over-supplied arsenals." "Yes," said Mr. Glass, "both France and Great Britain are supplying the American Army with guns; we are buying them and paying for them, just as France and Great Britain bought munitions from us when they could not get them quickly enough or in sufficient quantities from their own factories. And the fact does not constitute an indictment of the Government. Rather is it a clear index of the purpose and a hopeful sign of the diligence which the War Department is applying to the situation." Mr. Glass defended the rejection of the Lewis gun on several grounds, among which was the statement attributed to General Pershing that it would not be used on his front. Mr. Glass also explained certain other mat ters which have been subject to criticism, including the use of shoddy, or reworked wool, in uniforms, and quoted authority in support of a number of his statements. He went so far as to offer some defense of unpreparedness by declaring that in the close of 1916 the country had re-elected Mr. Wilson "because. among other considerations, he had been wise and brave enough to keep us out of war."

Mr. Glass is a Democrat and was defending a Democratic President; but as pronounced a defense has been uttered by a Republican, Mr. Borah, Senator from Idaho. In a speech in New York, while defending the character and patriotism of Mr. Chamberlain, and while acknowledging the making of some mistakes, he declared his belief that "in this emergency the Administration at Washington has done a great work in getting ready for this war."

The most striking tribute, however, was rendered by Andre Tardieu, French High Commissioner to the United States. He specified certain particulars (such as the great increase in the Army, the results in aviation, and the policy regarding ord nance) which deserved praise. As to ordnance he said:

But as we have agreed, it was understood that you should supply and transport to France the necessary war material; we will. under such conditions, be able in France to deliver to you before July 1 enough guns thoroughly to equip twenty of your divisions. The situation, therefore, is completely safe in that respect. As a conclusion Mr. Tardieu paid this high tribute: "Judg ing things as a whole, I declare, without any restriction and Government has well earned the praise of its allies and of without any reserve, that by its war policy the United States civilization, for which we are fighting together."