« ПретходнаНастави »
ber who refuses to teach certain doctrines is frequently an effective way of repressing expression along "heretical" lines.
In an effort to safeguard members of the faculty against discharge for exercising their right of free speech, the American Association of University Professors, in their annual conference in December 1915, adopted the following significant demands:
(1) That no official action be taken relating to reappointments or refusals of reappointment of members of the faculty before obtaining the advice and consent of a faculty committee.
(2) That in every institution a faculty member be given an unequivocal understanding as to the term of his appointment and that all positions above the grade of instructor, after ten years of service, be made permanent.
(3) That in each institution the grounds which are regarded as justifying a dismissal of members of the faculty be definitely formulated and the interpreting body be designated.
(4) That no person be dismissed without a fair trial by fellow members of the faculty or by fellow specialists or by representatives.
The adoption of these demands will be a long step toward converting the university from an "efficient oligarchy" into a genuine republic of letters.
Immigration from July 1, 1914, to June 30, 1915, dropped to the lowest figure since 1899. Total arrivals, including temporary and non-immigrants, was 434,244, or 968,837 less than in the preceding year, a decrease of 69%. The cause of this decrease is the European war.
Emigration during the same period amounted to 384,174, a decrease of 249,631.
For a number of years Congress has attempted to pass a more stringent restriction law. President Taft vetoed the Dillingham Bill on account of the "literacy-test" provision.
President Wilson in 1915 vetoed the Burnett Bill on the same ground, and because of the exclusion of revolutionists. The House failed by five votes to pass the Bill over his veto. Representative Burnett has re-introduced his Bill in the present Congress.
American Organized Labor has consistently backed up the effort to have a "literacy test" added to the restriction act, while Socialists have opposed this measure.
THE PROHIBITION MOVEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES,
(Anti-Saloon League Year Book, 1915, pp. 92-95.)
Prior to January 1, 1915, the absolute prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes had been adopted by nine states-Maine, Kansas, North Dakota, Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Tennessee and West Virginia. The aggregate population of these nine states, according to the 1910 census, was 14,685,961. On January 1, 1915, the Prohibition amendment to the state constitution of Arizona, which had been adopted by a vote of the people on November 3, 1914, went into effect, thus making ten states with an aggregate population of 14,890,315 under Prohibition at the beginning of the year 1915.
In the fall elections of 1914 the states of Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Virginia, as well as Arizona, all adopted state-wide Prohibition, which went into effect on January 1, 1916, in the cases of Colorado, Oregon and Washington; the Virginia law not going into effect until November 1, 1916.
The 1915 legislatures in several states adopted state-wide Prohibition measures during the first sixty days of the sessions. The legislature of Alabama passed a state-wide prohibitory statute over the veto of the governor early in the legislative session. A stringent Prohibition law was passed. by the legislature of Arkansas, putting that state under Prohibition January 1, 1916. The Iowa legislature repealed the Mulct act, thereby putting into full effect the old prohibitory law of the state. Idaho passed a state-wide Prohibition law which went into effect, January 1, 1916, and submitted a prohibitory amendment to be voted upon in 1916.
This makes, all told, eighteen states which are either under Prohibition at the present time or in which the prohibitory laws already adopted will go into effect in 1916. These eighteen states have an aggregate population of 25,828,613, according to the 1910 census.
One house of the legislature in each of the states of Montana, Utah and Vermont passed state-wide Prohibition measures early in 1915. Prior to January 1, 1915, the following states were under some form of local option: Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
In South Dakota the law places all sections of the state under Prohibition except in political subdivisions where a majority of the electors indicate that they do not wish the
provision of the prohibitory law to apply. This same kind of law was in operation in Arkansas and Iowa until January 1, 1915.
Wyoming and New Mexico have prohibited the sale of liquors in all sections except certain classes of incorporated municipalities.
The states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Nevada are under license, not even a general local option law being operative in these three commonwealths.
The United States government has prohibited the liquor traffic in the Indian Territory, in certain portions of other territories, in military forts and reservations, in the United States Navy, in the National Capitol at Washington and in national and state soldiers' homes as well as in other specified areas under federal control. As a result of the operation of these several state and national laws, more than 47,000,000 of the population of the United States were living under Prohibition and more than 71 per cent of the entire area of the nation was Prohibition territory at the close of the year 1914. The adoption of Prohibition in the several additional states referred to above will increase the population living in Prohibition territory in 1916 by more than 4,000,000 and will increase the amount of territory under prohibition in the United States to 76 per cent.
The following resolution calling for a national Prohibition amendment to the constitution came up before the House of Representatives on Dec. 22, 1914. One hundred and ninety-seven voted in favor of the measure and 189 against it. Since the resolution required a two-thirds majority, it failed of passage.
Section 1. The sale, manufacture for sale, transportation for sale, importation for sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes in the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof and exportation thereof are forever prohibited.
Section 2. The Congress or the states shall have power independently or concurrently to enforce this article by all needful legislation.
(For socialist position on the temperance movement, see section on the Socialist Movement in the United States.)
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
An element in the American patriotic programme is the organization of corporations for the promotion of overseas finance, under the title wrongly given to it of overseas trade. Its first expression is a gigantic $50,000,000 "American International Corporation" organized by the same group in New York that controls the munition firms, that is financing the present war for the allies, and that is backing the preparedness movement. According to its promotors, the movement is to enable the United States to take a larger part than heretofore "in the industrial development of other countries where capital is needed."
The countries "where capital is needed" are not Great、 Britain, France and Germany, the great investing nations of Europe. The countries "where capital is needed" are Mexico, Central and South America, Morocco, Tunis, Persia, Africa, China and the insular possessions of the United States and elsewhere. They are the countries into which the financiers of Europe have dragged their foreign offices, their diplomacy, and finally their navies for the protection of their shady investments.
"Wealth is accumulating," so the announcement of the new corporation reads, "so rapidly that a portion of it can be spared for investment abroad. The experience which our people have had in large scale production and in extensive construction work, has especially fitted us to carry on development work in other countries."
The Crime of Surplus Wealth.
"Surplus wealth" invested in weaker countries is the cause of more crimes, of the destruction of the liberties of more peoples, of the wastage of more men and wealth than any other single cause in the present generation. "Surplus wealth" invested abroad by the financiers of London, Berlin, Paris, Petrograd and Vienna is one of the hidden causes lying back of the present European war.
"Surplus wealth" lured Great Britain into Egypt. The English financiers made a loan to the Khedive in 1873 of $410,000,000. They gave the Khedive only $105,000,000 and kept $305,000,000 as security. "Surplus wealth" bankrupted that country. It destroyed Egyptian independence; it was
followed by intervention and the bombardment of Alexandria to protect the loan. European contractors overcharged the Khedive from 80 to 400 per cent on construction work, and the creditors sometimes got as much as twenty-five per cent interest on their loans. This was the beginning of financial imperialism thirty-three years ago.
"Surplus Wealth" led France into Morocco. In six years time the indebtedness of the Sultan to the European financiers was increased from $4,000,000 to $32,000,500. The Sultan received but a small part of the loan. He went bankrupt. He could only pay the interest by wringing it from the wretched natives who finally revolted. France intervened at the demand of the bankers. She occupied Morocco contrary to her pledge to Germany and England. Thousands of Moors were slain. Germany sent a gunboat to protest. Europe was on the verge of war in 1911 through the greed and dishonesty of the French bankers. The Morocco incident is one of the hidden causes of the present European
"Surplus Capital" lured Germany into Turkey. There were railroads, mines, docks, harbors, and trading concessions waiting to be exploited. The banks earned $25,000,000 commissions on building the Bagdad Railway, and besides saved $45,000,000 more in the cost of construction; all of which was charged to the Turkish Government. The banker was followed by the Kaiser and his armies. Turkey has lost her independence; the Balkan States have been embroiled, and Europe is now at war over the conflicting interests of England, Germany and Russia in Turkey.
"Surplus Capital" negotiated the Six Power Loan to China. China wanted but $30,000,000. The great banking institutions of the powers formed a combination and insisted that she take $300,000,000, or ten times her needs. The loan was accompanied by demands by the bankers for control of the internal administration and revenue system of China. It struck at her very life, and China declined the terms.
"Surplus Wealth" aided in strangling Persia at the hands of Russia and England. It ended the independence of Tunis. According to President David Starr Jordan, the Italian war against Tripoli had its motive in the speculations of the Bank of Rome. In the Balkan war "the final victory rested with the French bankers who furnished the war funds." Turkey in Asia, he says, is dominated by the Deutsche Bank, that nation within a nation, which replaces the Sultan as master of the rest of his domain, and which drains for itself the riches of the land, exhausting, not the working class alone but a whole nation, which is dying from its operations.