to higher levels of National life and duty.

This disappointment is not by any means confined to those who are still undecided. Here is a typical expression of disappointment from a college president who is going to vote the Prohibition ticket-President Lehman, of Eureka College (Illinois):

As a voting Prohibitionist, I have hoped that it would not be necessary this year for the party to have a candidate. But I shall continue to vote the Prohibition ticket for two reasons:

1. Because I believe we not only need a prohibition law, but the enforcement of it. We need, not only men in office who believe in the enforcement of all law, but men who believe in the prohibition law, or it will not be difficult for the Amendment to be nullified.

2. As a protest against the nominees of the two major parties. In a time when the problems facing our Government appear to be unusually momentous, they have nominated candidates by the process of political trading and have secured men who are generally recognized as the result of all sorts of compromises. I have yet to see anywhere, and I travel a good deal, especially in my State, any enthusiasm for either nominee for President.

This testimony of the Prohibitionist that voters in other parties are no more enthusiastic than he is supported by evidence in these letters. For example, President Frank E. Jenkins, of Piedmont College (Georgia), writes unen

thusiastically that he intends to vote for the Democratic nominee, Mr. Cox, because

I see no other way to vote for the League of Nations. I do not like his record on the saloon question nor his connection with Tammany and Taggart.

In similar vein write several who

have marked their ballots for Harding. For example, President L. H. Murlin, of Boston University (Massachusetts), writes:

I shall vote the Republican ticket because, while not wholly satisfactory either in candidate or platform, I am quite sure that the Republican party offers the larger hope for a sane, safe, conservatively progressive programme for our country at home and abroad. Moreover, as the campaign develops, the lack of sincerity of Mr. Cox and his party appears more and more, and the sounder and permanent qualities of Harding and Republicanism become more and more evident.

the Republican party made choice of a reactionary, pledged to defeat any common-sense policy for peace and for the League." Now he writes unequivocally of Governor Cox's "courageous and sensible stand on all public questions that really matter."

CONTROLLING REASONS

are

lege presidents who have written to In determining their choice the colThe Outlook have been guided by reasons which may be grouped under three heads: Their judgment on the parties, their judgment on the personalities of the candidates, and their judgment on the chief issues. Like many other voters, college presidents affected by political habit and custom. To have been a lifelong Republican or Democrat is a compelling reason for continuing to be such. President Slover, of Clarendon College (Texas), for example, frankly says that he will vote the Democratic ticket because he is a lifelong Democrat and the Democratic candidate more nearly stands for what he wants than any other. President John O. Willson, of Lander College (South Carolina), who gives as one of his reasons the issue of the League of Nations, as does also President Slover, puts first as his reason for voting for Governor Cox his memory of the tyranny of Congressional rule' in 1865. and the years following," explaining that "Mr. Harding's plan to be largely influenced by the United States Senate reminds the South of what she suffered under Thaddeus Stevens and his

66

JOHN HENRY MACCRACKEN, PRESIDENT LAFAYETTE COLLEGE

Paul Thompson

out. America cannot live apart from
the world.

One college president goes so far as to say that remaining out would be criminal. Most of the supporters of Mr. Cox express this belief in the League and many put it as the paramount reason. Among those who for argue the League is one whose opinion has special weight because of his experience. President John N. Bennett, of Doane College (Nebraska), writes:

I was with our armies in France for nearly seventeen months, and I feel very deeply the sting of ingratitude and the puerile opposition to the trend of the age as exhibited by the Republicans.

President Harper, of Elon College (North Carolina), says that in withholding our approval from the League 66 we have become the Pharisee of the nations," and thinks it tragic.

Not all those, however, who favor the League are in favor of Mr. Cox. For example, President G. N. Briggs, of Graceland College (Iowa), writes:

Under our form of government with its "checks and balances " I believe the election of Governor Cox will postpone for years the possibility of our entering any form of international association, whereas I believe the election of Senator Harding will materially advance the very essential cause of peace and the organization of an association of nations.

The minds of others who are in favor of the League of Nations but more doubtful of the Republican attitude towards it are represented by these words by President H. M. Gage, of Huron College (South Dakota):

move

If Harding continues to toward the League-to Taft's and Wickersham's position, I shall vote for him. Otherwise I am inclined to think I shall not.

On the other hand are many who are distinctly opposed to the League of Nations as at present constituted and regard the election of Mr. Harding as

Paul Thompson

necessary to prevent the United States from joining it without modifications. For example, President J. M. Wood, of Stephens College (Missouri), writes:

I am opposed to America's entering any League of Nations that is built upon political considerations. The nucleus of any co-operative movement should be an international court.

Others likewise express the belief that international relations should be based on the Hague plan rather than the Paris plan, a court rather than a diplomatic council.

A large proportion of those who advocate the election of Mr. Cox his urge election because he is progressive and forward-looking. "Senator Harding seems to look back," writes President J. E. Allen, of Davis and Elkins College (West Virginia), "while Cox looks forward." What many of these college presidents who speak of progressiveness have in mind President Allen specifically gives in the rest of his statement, which connects the issue of progressiveness with labor and the League of Nations so as to make it a single issue

:

Senator Harding and his immediate advisers would probably not have the co-operation of labor; Governor Cox would be more apt to invite the confidence of this great power in the country. Cox will be as able to lead this country into the League under the best conditions as Harding. Neither will have the control of the Senate in case of election. There is enough leading power in the present Republican party to prevent our entering any league. This would almost be a challenge to the world of our desire to fight it out as heretofore, and it is my candid opinion that a large majority of labor in this country would refuse to take up arms except to defend this country from immediate invasion.

Others who see this issue give it another interpretation. They feel the necessity at this time not so much for untried measures as for the recovery of what seems to them to have been lost. This is variously expressed. Some put it

(C) Keystone View Co.

WILLIAM MILLER COLLIER, PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIV.

66

as the need for a sane, solid, substantial Administration with a Cabinet of strong men," to use the words of President J. H. Wood, of Culver-Stockton College (Missouri). Others put it more specifically as the need for what President Kroeze, of Jamestown College (North Dakota), calls "a strong, stabilizing force in government at this foundations of representative governcritical period in our history when the ment are in danger." President J. F. Lane, of Lane College (Tennessee), thinks that "just after a reign of military authority" there is special need for a strong, firm, and sane administration of affairs through civil authorities." A number of the college presidents writing to us put this issue more specifically still by the advocacy, on the one hand, of Wilson's policies and indorsement of his record and by advocacy, on the other hand, of a reversal of what is termed 66 one man rule" and a return to methods more in accord with American traditions and practices. Thus President Gordon, of Henry Kendall College (Oklahoma), writes that "President Wilson proved the most able leader that the world has ever seen in his conduct during the war," that it was "very unfortunate indeed that he has been attacked by men who differ from him," and that "Cox should be elected President as a recognition of the splendid. and almost superhuman work that President Wilson did in the great war.

On the other hand, there are men who take exactly the opposite position. President H. C. Culbertson, of Ripon College (Wisconsin), declares: "Although I am in favor of the League of Nations, yet I am opposed to the methods of the Wilson Administration, and, on the whole, I believe that there is more hope of future safe constructive leadership in international, social, and industrial affairs through the Republican party."

Mr. Cox's charges of corruption have made little impression, only two or three presidents referring to them. In one case these charges have gained or con

firmed a vote for Mr. Cox, but in the other cases they have supplied reasons against him, one of the presidents deploring in particular Mr. Cox's "firerating" methods.

In a number of cases prohibition figures sometimes as an argument for Mr. Harding, sometimes as a matter

FROM FRANK D. BLODGETT Adelphi College, Brooklyn, N. Y. I am heartily supporting Senator Harding for many reasons, perhaps chief among them being that I am a Republican and believe in the principles of that party, in its constructive work, its sound sense, and its wise grasp of the vital issues of America. I believe Senator Harding is in sympathy with the things I believe in, that he has the bigness to realize that no man = alone can control the destinies of America

19

and the world, and that he possesses the wisdom to be willing to seek counsel, the keenness of judgment to discriminate, and the courage to execute. He expresses in his public utterances what I conceive to be Sound Americanism. I believe that, if elected, he will surround himself with men of large caliber, of balance, of wisdom, and that helped by the advice of such men he will be a President who will lead the Nation along the lines of real progress.

FROM BOOTHF C. DAVIS Alfred University, Alfred, N. Y. Senator Harding seems to me to represent American ideals and citizenship, progressive without radicalism, constructive rather than destructive, sane and balanced in judgment, safeguarding American nationality with a world sympathy not inconsistent with National integrity.

FROM F. N. GUNSAULUS

Armour Institute of Tech., Chicago, Ill. I shall vote for Harding in the hope that a little less of the stiff and hopeless partisanship on both sides may open a way for the use of the very machinery which Germany declined to honor in the past and which all nations must somehow honor in the future if we are to have peace and progress.

FROM BENJAMIN IDE WHEELER University of California, Berkeley, Cal. 1. Because Governor Cox and his sympathizers give the clearest adherence to the 'League of Nations."

2. Because the Republican candidate and his sympathizers represent the reactionary spirit in politics.

N. B.--Both as a Californian and as an American citizen, I regard the immigration question as far the most important now pending before the Nation. Senator Harding has spoken concerning it with decision and clarity. Should Governor Cox fail to speak with like decision, I think it probable that I shall vote for Senator Harding.

FROM C. A. DUNIWAY Colorado College, Colorado Springs, Col. On the whole, Harding represents the sounder tendencies of American political life. Then, man for man, in a personal sense, he seems to me the preferred candidate. I made my decision slowly, because

new

Fisk University, Nashville, Tenn. In reply to your inquiry concerning my choice of Presidential ticket let me say that I expect to vote for the Republican ticket and am earnestly desirous of its success for many reasons. In particular I am a believer in what we may call the " nationalism," which, on the one hand, insists on the protection of the integrity and high standards of our Republic while extending the most cordial helping hand to the whole world, and, on the other hand, works in accord with the ever-increasing tendency toward National unity through Federal action which, in my opinion, is being worked out and will be worked out with the advice and co-operation of the best thought in our several State units. I conceive the Republican party to represent at this moment a policy of legalized and stabilized prosperity, order, and progress.

FROM WILLIAM MILLER COLLIER George Washington Univ., Wash., D. C.

I favor the election of Harding because by training as well as in temperament he is, in my opinion, far better fitted for the Presidency than Cox; because he will re

permit printing all of the letters in full. Even those letters which we have not been able to quote from as a whole or in part are of great value, and The Outlook and its readers are under obligations to every one of these college presidents who have stated the reasons that governed their vote.

store Constitutional government, preserve a representative democracy, refrain from demagoguery, and give to the country an efficient Administration protecting and promoting the rights of each as well as of all, but without favoring or yielding to any group or any individual.

I favor Harding's election also because he stands for an association of the nations of the world to secure peace by agreement to submit international disputes of a justiciable character to the decision of arbitral courts with suitable sanctions, and to confer in a spirit of harmony as to other questions; and because he opposes the ratification of the Covenant of the League of Nations as submitted to the Senate by President Wilson. I believe that that Covenant would embroil this Nation in the quarrels of Europe and Asia; and that it would immensely increase the chances of war because in effect the decision as to declaring future wars would be made, so far as the United States is concerned, not by Congress but by one person, its representative in the Council of the League acting under the instructions of the President. No more reactionary step was ever taken. By the "Wilson Covenant" the President is given practically the same war powers as the Kaiser of Germany had; while the Council, in the method of its creation, the relation of its members to the states they represent, and its functions as to the determination of the great question of war or peace, resembles most closely the old German Bundesrath. This system was universally regarded as the greatest cause of the World War and as inherently incompatible with peace. We fought to destroy it. Let us not restore it by this fatuous Covenant.

FROM WILLIAM W. GUTH
Goucher College, Baltimore, Md.

I am an independent voter. I should have been glad to vote for a stronger man than any of those nominated. In any event, I should vote for the man exhibiting the greatest amount of brain power, and who, in my opinion, sensed most clearly our obligations to society-and our duties, international as well as National. Of the men nominated Mr. Harding is far to be preferred as possessing these qualifications, and I shall therefore vote for him.

FROM J. H. T. MAIN
Grinnell College, Grinnell, Iowa

I am in favor of the League Covenant, believing its provisions, carried out with even a moderate degree of success, would contribute to international good will, and hence to world peace and order. The United States, as a member of the League, if adequately represented in the League councils, could, by its economic supremacy, leaving ideal considerations out of the question, exercise a dominating influence for peace without advocating military in