Obrázky na stránke

of Orenburg, declared that peasants in his diocese who had eaten the last of their food were applying to their priests to give them the last sacraments, in view of impending death.


In this famine, as in the famines of 1891 and 1906, the relief measures of the Government have failed in timeliness and adequacy. Public works have been organized in a number of the famine-stricken provinces, and $60,000,000 has been appropriated for the purchase of food and seed; but under bureaucratic management the public works have failed to give employment to millions who need it, and the famine relief fund is not half large enough to meet the urgent needs of the starving population. It would be supposed that in such a crisis the Government would give every possible encouragement and assistance to societies and private individuals who are willing to co-operate in the work of famine relief; but the Council of Ministers is so much' afraid of a possible revolutionary propaganda in the guise of relief work that it will not allow the public at large to furnish aid, to distribute food, or even to solicit subscriptions for the benefit of the starving people. In this respect the Ministry of Kokovtsef is more despotic and reactionary than even that of Stolypin. In reply to an interpellation in the Duma, in 1906, Premier Stolypin said: "Local organizations and private individuals will not be obstructed in famine-relief work. On the contrary, they will have the fullest sympathy and support." Premier Kokovtsef, however, takes a different view of the situation. When representatives of twenty-two benevolent societies in St. Petersburg called upon him, a few weeks ago, and asked permission to organize faminerelief work, they were informed that the Council of Ministers had decided not to allow societies or private individuals to carry on such work independently of the Government. In the famine of 1906 the Piragof Medical Society, which has branches in all parts of the Empire, raised a fund of a million rubles and fed for months more than one hundred thousand people, in twenty-three provinces. This year it is forbidden to organize such relief, and its funds in the province of Perm have been confiscated by the local authorities. In 1906 the Free Economic Society of St. Petersburg—the oldest scientific organization in Russia—maintained twelve hundred

food-distributing agencies and fed one hundred and twenty thousand starving peasants, at a cost of five hundred thousand rubles. This year it is not allowed to do famine-relief work of any kind. Newspapers in all parts of the Empire have been forbidden to solicit public subscriptions for the relief of the destitute people, and if they venture to criticise the famine-relief policy of the administration their editors are fined or imprisoned. It would seem to a foreign observer that a Government must be very insecure or very cowardly when it dares not trust such organizations as the Free Economic Society, the Piragof Medical Society, and the Society for the Preservation of the Public Health to distribute food or employ additional physicians in provinces where the people are dying of starvation, scurvy, and hunger-typhus.


Following his announcement at the Durbar, George V, King of England and Emperor of India, has now laid the first stones of the new capital city of IndiaDelhi. No Imperial announcement, we believe, has ever appealed more to the imagination of the people of India-to the imagination of Hindu and Mohammedan alike. For Delhi is intimately associated in the Hindu mind with sacred legends which go back to the dawn of history. To the Mohammedans there is the prospect of the restoration of the ancient capital of the Mogul Emperors. The secret of the proposed change had been well kept, though the King-Emperor was careful to state that his action-"We have decided upon the transfer of the seat of the Government of India from Calcutta to the ancient capital, Delhi "-had been taken "on the advice of our Ministers." The opposition leaders in Parliament have announced their commendable decision not to comment upon the action before the King's return to England. The only serious criticisms which have as yet been made come, as might be expected, from two sources: first, from Calcutta, a city which seems to care quite as much for the effect of the change on her commercial interests as on her political prestige; and, second, from economists who deplore the inevitable costliness of the change. At all events, the Government has shown a sense of poetic justice in the appeal to Indian sentiment by the dramatic announcement that the Indian capital shall

[blocks in formation]

: Govern-
e ancient

"on the opposition ced their ment upon n to Engms which might be rst, from re quite as ge on her litical presmists who ess of the Government stice in the he dramatic capital shall

henceforth be no merely commercial city, like Bombay or Calcutta, but one which, as the London "Times " says, " embodies for the Indian people the traditional conception of a truly Imperial city hallowed by great memories." If the historical claims of Delhi to the primacy among the cities of India cannot be disputed, it is, as the "Times" adds, from the political point of view that the transfer of the seat of government offers the most striking advantages:

One of the great difficulties of an alien Government in a country. . . such as India is that of keeping in touch with all the different sections of a huge population. . . . For that purpose the capital could hardly have been more unfortunately located than at Calcutta. . . . At Delhi the Government of India will not merely occupy a much more central position geographically, but it will be in immediate contact with much more varied types of Indian society. The Punjab itself is the meeting-point of many different creeds and races-Sikhs, Hindus, and Mohammedans. . . . As distances go in India, the Supreme Government at Delhi will be within equally easy reach of Central India and of the Northwest frontier, and as accessible from the Bombay Presidency as from Bengal. If .. the future of India lies in decentralization, Delhi is far better placed than, say, either Washington or Ottawa, to play the part of a federal capital detached from the narrow interests of any single province, and keeping watch at the same time over all.

The news that General Reyes had surrendered himself to the Mexican Government was a great surprise to all who have followed the course of Mexican affairs. General Reyes frankly admits that his effort to incite a revolution against President Madero was a total failure. General Reyes has made a declaration in which he states that in order to bring about a counterrevolution he issued a call to the discontented revolutionists, the army, and the people, and he adds, "Not one man answered my summons." The first impulse is to draw from this an inference which is not entirely justifiable. General Reyes's surrender does not necessarily mean that Madero is to have smooth sailing. There are two directions from which armed opposition to the newly established Government may come; Reyes represented only one of these, namely, the reactionary element, which has no sympathy whatever with projects of reform and of establishing a truly representative form of government. The other source of opposition is that of the extreme radicals, who think

that Madero, now in power, wishes to become a dictator and a ruler of the Diaz type instead of carrying out his promises and putting his broad theories of reform into operation. These radicals are numerous, but they are rash in assuming the truth of the reports against Madero. The new President has only lately entered upon office, and how he will conduct himself is still a matter of conjecture. To the honest radicals who are afraid of despotism are joined the bandits and desperadoes who are always eagerly awaiting a chance for violence and robbery. Accordingly outbreaks are reported from time to time at distant points, and will doubtless continue to take place. There is no evidence, however, that a large and concerted military movement is in progress against Madero's authority.


[ocr errors]

A good name is better than riches. This is true of towns as well as individuals. Newark, Ohio, has learned that fact. A correspondent informs us that that city is doing its best to re-establish its good reputation. A year and a half ago there was a peculiarly disgraceful lynching there. What was disgraceful about it was not only the lynching itself, but the state of public opinion, and particularly the state of public morals as represented in the city government, which made the lynching and its attendant circumstances possible. Excuses have been offered for that occurrence. It is said that the whole body of citizens of Newark cannot be justly held culpable for this horrible crime, because fivesixths of the citizens were not aware of what was happening; because many of the other sixth, even if they could have foreseen what the excited crowd might do, had a right to rely upon the Mayor and police and Sheriff to keep peace and protect life; because the Mayor and the police could have quelled the mob if they had acted together; and because the people of the city had no idea that the mob would attempt to attack a jail and seize the man who, in the performance of his duty, had roused the anger of the disorderly element. Of course these excuses are only excuses. They constitute no defense for the people of Newark, inasmuch as the people of Newark were responsible for putting into power a city government which was incompetent and openly committed to a policy of non-enforcement of law. Americans, whether of Newark, Ohio, or of

any other community, are intelligent enough generally to understand that they are responsible for their own government, and it is poor business for them to try to lay the blame for misgovernment upon others than themselves. Fortunately, however, the people of Newark have not been content to offer excuses. They have evidently been aroused to the necessity of repairing the damage they have done to the good name of their own city. The correspondent whom we have already mentioned refers, in support of this statement, to the following series of occurrences: first, charges were promptly lodged with the Governor, asking for the removal of the Mayor and the Sheriff, who both resigned; second, a special grand jury found indictments against over forty of the mob, charging most of them with murder in the first degree, and the rest of them with rioting and assault and battery; third, another grand jury indicted four more members of the mob; fourth, thirty-five of the indicted men have been tried and have been convicted of manslaughter, or have pleaded guilty of manslaughter, and have been sentenced-one, convicted of murder in the second degree, to imprisonment for life, others to imprisonment ranging from fifteen months to twenty years; one of the mob was acquitted, four were not prosecuted, others at the time our correspondent wrote were awaiting trial or were out on bail; fifth, the Mayor, who was responsible for the participation of the city as a city in this relapse into savagery and brutality, has sought "vindication as a candidate for nomination, and has been defeated. We wish to call especial attention to our correspondent's account of the efforts of Newark to undo the evil that was done by that lynching. According to this account, that city has done at least considerable to show that its repentance is the only kind that is worth having the repentance that expresses itself in deeds.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

cific charge of manslaughter as regards one person, Margaret Schwartz, in that they knowingly kept the doors of the factory locked contrary to law-which, the Judge charged, would have constituted manslaughter in the first degree; or, that they had been culpably negligent and had omitted reasonable precautions as regards safety from fire of employees-which would constitute manslaughter in the second degree. The trial turned chiefly on the question whether Margaret Schwartz's life was lost because a particular door was locked by the order or with the knowledge of Blanck and Harris. On this point several witnesses on either side flatly contradicted one another. That perjury was committed seems certain, even allowing for the excitement and terror of the scene and for the fact that witnesses rarely agree as to exactly what happens in a panic. But the jury was unwilling to reject a large body of testimony as wholesale perjury, and, this being so, had no alternative but to acquit. It is entirely within the power of the District Attorney to begin other prosecutions if he thinks he has a good case, and there are other forms of prosecution possible than that for manslaughter. Morally, at least, the people of New York. are convinced that these men-in common, it is true, with scores of other factory-owners

-were guilty of carrying on their work (whether through greed or indifference) in such a way that their employees' lives were in constant danger. That they should be punished, if this can be shown, is the deep conviction not only of those who know the horrors of that day of hideous torture and the days of pitiful suffering which followed, but the conviction also of those who feel that law must be respected and lawbreakers dealt with if the city's safety and honor are to be preserved. And it should not be forgotten that the people of the whole city are guilty also of future manslaughter unless they insistently demand that laws are enacted and enforced to safeguard life to the last limit of possibility.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

teurs "), with Auguste Rodin as its President, has hitherto consistently declined to exhibit as a society outside of France. It is to the relentless persistence, not to say importunity, of a woman that America. owes the present opportunity of studying a considerable body of the work of these modern Frenchmen, said to constitute the strongest and most homogeneous of the numerous societies exhibiting in Paris. Miss Cornelia Sage, Director of the Albright Art Gallery, wanted that collection. One by one she overcame the objections of artists and dealers against sending priceless work so far into the interior of darkest America. She persuaded them of the security of the marble gallery in Buffalo against the attacks of those roving herds of bison which hovered menacingly in the Frenchmen's minds. In the end she won a representative collection of the work of the entire Society, including four pictures loaned by the Luxembourg-an unheard-of concession. Supplemented by loans from American collectors and dealers, the exhibition includes one hundred and sixty numbers, the work of thirty artists-such men as Besnard, Cottet, Aman-Jean, Lucien Simon, Ménard, the late Eugène Carrière, La Touche, Jacques-Émile Blanche, Rodin, and Prince Paul Troubetzkoy. The fact that such a collection as this remains for more than thirty days in a city like Buffalo argues strongly in favor of the foresight of Mr. Albright in providing a superb art museum for a city possessed of no more than a modest collection of pictures. The marble gallery, set in the open country on the edge of Delaware Park, insures loaned treasures against fire risk. Its not too crowded rooms afford magnificent architectural setting for the loan collections with which it is kept almost constantly filled. Buffalo sees pictures. If one excepts small dealers' exhibits, Buffalo sees more representative American pictures in a year than does, for example, Boston. And many a foreign exhibition, like that of the bronzes of Prince Paul Troubetzkoy, delights Buffalonians while it skips the Hub. Foreign artists, like Sorolla and the Russian sculptor just named, are welcomed at dignified public receptions at the Albright Art Gallery, which makes their personality as well as their work familiar to the art lovers of the city. First possessions, and then a gallery to put them in-it is undoubtedly the way of logic. But there is certainly something to be said for Mr. Albright's method of putting the cart before the horse.

A half-empty, highly hospitable gallery may do wonders toward the art education of a city.


The American Academy in Rome, which is now housed in the capacious and beautifully situated Villa Aurelia, on Mount Janiculum, was the subject last week of an interesting discussion between Senator Root and Senator Bailey. The Academy, as readers of The Outlook will remember, was one of the many, important results of the World's Fair at Chicago. A group of architects and sculptors who had worked together on that vision of a city of the future which caught the imagination of the entire country, and gave impulse both to sculpture and to architecture of the highest importance, realized for the first time what could be accomplished by co-operation. They had done a great National work, and they were reluctant, as were all people who saw their work, to have that achievement go into the past without some permanent memorial. After the consideration of many plans, in 1894 the architects organized the American School of Architecture in Rome, sending over for a time one student a year and giving him such accommodations as it could command. The value of the school broadened the interest in it; and the American Academy finally grew out of it and was housed in the Villa Mirafiore, with its attractive gardens, for a number of years; and there a small group of young men students in architecture, sculpture, and painting-found a delightful home and facilities for advanced work. During the summers they went to various sections and made original studies in art and architecture. In a way the Academy resembled the famous French Academy, housed in the beautiful Villa Medici, where the happy winners of the Prix de Rome receive advanced instruction in the different departments of art; but the American school has been freer in its methods, and endeavors to give suggestion and aid rather than formal instruction. It was recently united with the American School of Architecture, and both are now housed in the Villa Aurelia, the gift of a generous woman who for many years took a great interest in their work. There are three contests every year in this country for the Rome scholarships. Students from every part of the country submit their work in com.

petition; and the prize-winners are sent to Rome for three years at the expense of the Academy, with an annual allowance of a thousand dollars a year each for their expenses, and also with an allowance for all legitimate traveling expenses. The Academy is a fine representative in Rome of the American spirit and the American people, is thorougly democratic in its character, and is an extension of educational opportunity, for the most gifted young men, of the highest importance to the country.


Six years ago, by special statute of Congress, the American Academy in Rome was incorporated as a Federal corporation, no grant being asked of Congress, but an endowment of one million dollars being raised by private subscription. Among the contributors to this endowment were Mr. Morgan, Mr. Walter, Mr. William K. Vanderbilt, and others, and among the organizers were Mr. Hay and Mr. Root. A bill has been before Congress for some time making certain changes in the incorporation of the Academy under the laws of the District of Columbia, in order that it might receive the benefits of a bequest given by the generous woman who had previously left her beautiful villa as its home. Senator Root introduced the bill, and no opposition was expected; but Senator Bailey appeared on the scene with the declaration that he was opposed to encouraging institutions for American students abroad " until every hill in America is crowned with a public schoolhouse," adding that the Government ought to give its attention to the millions "who struggle far beneath the point of desiring instruction in art." Said the eloquent orator :

If, forgetting the youth of our land, many of whom are denied the priceless blessing of even a common-school education, they choose to devote their fortune to the higher education of special classes, that is their concern, not mine. But when Congress is asked to give its sanction in a way which I think is beyond its power, ungracious as it may seem, I feel constrained to protest.

Mr. Root's reply gave him the opportunity of stating briefly the object of the Academy:

It is a corporation of the District of Columbia which maintains in the city of Rome a school

for the benefit of American youth, selected by competition from all parts of the United States, in order that not the city of Rome may be benefited, but in order that the people of the United States may have for their own sons and daugh ters an advancement in taste and in the knowl edge of those arts that promote the happiness

of mankind, in order that Americans will not be confined in obtaining their knowledge and edution in art at second hand, but may be enabled to go to the fountain source from which the art of the world is so greatly drawn.

Senator Root recalled the educational influence of the great Court of Honor at the Chiimpulse to the creation of beauty, which is a cago Fair, the pleasure which it gave and the part of the need of human beings; declaring that, in his belief, after men had eaten and drunken all they can, worn all the clothes they need, and satisfied their material wants, there is great happiness to be obtained from the cultivation of taste. The founders of the Republic, he said, had no academy at Rome, but they had Thomas Jefferson in Europe, cultivating his tastes, and bringing home a strong artistic impulse of which the beautiful design of the University of Virginia is one of the fruits. In answer to Senator Bailey's organized without an art department, Mr. declaration that that University had been Root replied that Jefferson also designed Monticello, that he added his share to the creation of the Capitol and the White House, and that he took a large part in the development of Colonial architecture, the most delightful architectural creation of the New

World. Whether or not the discussion illuminated the mind of the Senator from Texas, it evidently converted the Senate; for the bill was passed without the formality of a rollcall. It would be a great injustice to treat Senator Bailey's pictorial oratory as an expression of his convictions; he was undoubtedly speaking to those larger galleries which include the constituents of every Senator whose conception of his office enables him to speak, not to the Senate, but to the men

who elected him and who are to decide whether he shall stay or return home.


[ocr errors]

The discovery that a number of classical writers who, because they have long been classics, have been accepted as truth-tellers, were, as a matter of fact, mere

gossips, and malicious gossips at that, has led to the rehabilitation of several damaged reputations. Tiberius, for instance, long regarded as a dissolute tyrant, spending a shameful old age in his palace at Capri, appears to have spent his time largely with Greek philosophers and in studious pursuits.. In 1910 a gallant Frenchman came to the rescue of Phryne, arguing that no evidence

« PredošláPokračovať »