by the legislatures of two-thirds of the signatory states. In case the legislature of any signatory consists of more than one chamber, the vote shall be taken by the joint session of such chambers.

ARTICLE VII-ADOPTION

Section 1. This constitution shall become effective when ratified by states representing one-half the population of the world, colonials of a signatory to be included, provided that it is ratified by six of the following eight states: England, France, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, Japan and the United States. The treaty-making authorities of each state shall determine the method of ratification therein.

ANNOTATION

A unicameral legislature is proposed becauses it centralizes responsibility, lends itself to prompt action, and gives greater representation to the enlightened states than they would have in a bicameral legislature with equal representation in the upper house.

The manner of choosing the members of the congress is left to the determination of the legislatures of the respective states because this seems to be the most democratic feasible method.

Representation can not be based upon population, for such a basis would give states with a large proportion of illiterates the same pro rata representation as states with highly developed educational systems; for instance, China would have four times the representation of the United States of America if it were based upon population. The literacy basis is simple, in accord with real power and influence, and yet is an incentive for every state to increase its literate population. Statistics on illiteracy in the various countries are supplied by the bureau of the census, and may be found on page 634 of the World Almanac for 1917.

The diversity of language is an inconvenience to union, but not a barrier. The inhabitants of Switzerland speak three different languages, and in reality belong to three different nationalities-French, Italian and German-and are partly Catholic and partly Protestant; yet the Swiss government is

famous for its unity and efficiency, and the people are renowned for their happiness. Canada is a federation of French and English; the members of the South Africa Union differ in language, nationality, color, religion and temperament; Belgium has two official languages; Austria-Hungary contains peoples speaking many different languages; to say nothing of China.

Already we feel the need of a common language in which scientists may give publicity to the results of their research, and an international state would no doubt give great impetus to such a language, and in time may be able to adopt it as its official language. But this is only a look into the future, and not an essential to union. Does diversity of language, racial antagonism or cultural difference explain why until twenty years ago England was friendly with Germany and deeply hostile to France and Russia? Why Bismarck dropped Germany's alliance with Russia? Why Germany supplanted England as a friend of Turkey? Or why Russia and Japan, who fought ten years ago, are now allies? Hate is not so much a political reality as a cultural fantasy which creates popular moods in order to justify and promote national errors.

The clause giving the congress power to regulate commerce among the several states might be used sparingly at first, as it was by the congress of the United States of America; but as national jealousy yields to international cooperation, the use of the power may increase, as it has done in the United States of America. In time it may even result in the abolition of all tariff barriers so that commerce may move from one national state to another as it does from one state to another in the United States of America.

An international bank is advocated for three reasons: (1) as an institution through which capital might safely be invested; (2) as an institution for lending money to backward states through a medium that would not call upon national states to guarantee its collection; and (3) as a means of developing backward states which are now the bone of contention for the commercial imperialistic nations-"the states of diplomacy," to use Walter Lippman's apt phrase.

The army of the international police force would provide

each state with sufficient troops for internal police duties, and the navy would keep pirates from the seas. These forces might be gradually decreased as law and order remove the causes of international conflict. Also, as all munitions would be manufactured by the United Sovereign States, there would be no private munition makers to create war scares.

An important duty of the congress would be the promotion of international good will through the translation and circulation of literature advocating the brotherhood of man.

The provisions for the executive council and president are very similar to the organization of the British cabinet through the prime minister.

The judicial department is substantially the same as that proposed by Dr. James Brown Scott for the World's Court League.

Secret treaties are prohibited, as the uncertainty created by them has always tended to unduly arouse national suspicion, fear, and military preparedness.

The control of civil wars is left to the congress, rather than to the executive council, because the majority of the members of the congress, if not all, will represent states with the republican form of government, and their intervention would not likely perpetuate an unjust government. Disturbances within a state of the United States of America may be prevented by the president of the United States in the maintenance of a republican form of government, which the constitution guarantees. The guarantee of a republican form of government for the proposed United Sovereign States would perhaps be impossible, as several states without republican government should become members.

If the peace conference does not prove a suitable assembly for the discussion of international union, the president of the United States of America may feel warranted to take the initiative to request the governments of the world to send reprepresentatives to an international congress, in view of the authorization given him in the naval appropriation bill for 1916, which reads as follows:

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States to adjust and settle its international disputes through mediation or arbitration, to

the end that the war may be honorably avoided. It looks with apprehension and disfavor upon a general increase of armament throughout the world, but it realizes that no single nation can disarm, and that without a common agreement upon the subject every considerable power must maintain a relative standing in military strength.

In view of the premises, the president is authorized and requested to invite, at an appropriate time, not later than the close of the war in Europe, all the great governments of the world to send representatives to a conference which shall be charged with the duty of formulating a plan for a court of arbitration or other tribunal, to which disputed questions between nations shall be referred for adjudication and peaceful settlement, and to consider the question of disarmament and submit their recommendation to their respective governments for approval. The president is hereby authorized to appoint nine citizens of the United States who, in his judgment, shall be qualified for the mission by eminence in the law and by devotion to the cause of peace, to be representatives of the United States in such a conference. The president shall fix the compensation of said representatives and such secretaries and other employes as may be needed. Two hundred thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated and set aside and placed at the disposal of the president to carry into effect the provisions of this paragraph.

A Dire World Menace to be Converted

into a World Opportunity

1.-Queries With Which Humanity Is Confronted in This World Crisis

Shall humanity as a whole aspire to have a soul as the sequel to this war, or shall the war have an outcome forcing the nations of the earth to assume yet more fully the regimen and the traits of the lion and the tiger in their relations one with the other? What of the long-cherished ideals of liberty, fraternity and equality? Shall they be enthroned in international affairs as they have been sanctioned in all intranational relations, or shall they be repudiated as false voices that beckon only toward quagmires of sloth and pusillanimity? Shall the God of the nations be a Jehovah, the Father, or a brutalized Odin?

Shall democracy be promoted as the handmaid of progress and the guide toward the millenium? Or shall autocracy be hailed as humanity's most beneficent guardian? Shall cooperation among individuals and among nations increase, or shall domination and servitude be universalized? Are the opportunities for more intimate association, interdependence and mutual service among nations, so rapidly enhanced during recent centuries by science and invention, to reach fruition in a world community of peace and good will? Or is this outlook for humanity all a hideous mistake because of the essential constitution of human nature that requires for the fostering of what is best in it a regimen of fierce hate and an unending and frightful struggle for domination? In a word, shall there be a human brotherhood and a family of nations with equality of opportunity for all, or shall some dominate the others as man has dominated beasts of burden?

II.-The World's Experience in This War Is Engendering a New Hope and Creating for the American Public a Unique Responsibility

Germany, in precipitating this war and in her conduct of it, has identified herself with the principle of ruthless might. It is her challenge to the world and to the future. Upon it she