the rounds of the press throughout the country:

HOW ABOUT THIS, COLONEL ?

(From the San Francisco Argonaut) Recently a dinner was given to Oscar Straus in honor of his long career of public service. Naturally Theodore Roosevelt was present, and was one of the first called upon for a speech (says the New York Evening "Post"). With little preamble the ex-President launched into an appreciation of his ex-Cabinet officer's public record. "Believe me, gentlemen," he said, "when I called Mr. Straus to my Cabinet I was considering no questions of religion or race or station. I was considering only his fitness, for the office to which I had elected him. Neither as German nor as Jew was Mr. Straus called to my Cabinet -but simply as the man most fitted for the position." The next speaker was Jacob H. Schiff, who, as everybody knows, is a bit deaf and at times absent-minded. After the proper greetings the financier began slowly, "My friends," he said, "when Mr. Roosevelt wrote and asked me whom I considered the best Jew for the position...

This bit of amusing but wholly untrue gossip is based upon a speech of Mr. Roosevelt's at a banquet of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations which was held at the Hotel Astor on Wednesday evening, January 18, 1911. We have taken the pains to obtain a copy of the "American Hebrew," which gives an account of the banquet with verbatim reports of the speeches, and to ask both Mr. Straus and Mr. Schiff to give us the facts. The facts are that Mr. Schiff said of Mr. Roosevelt (reading from a manuscript which he held in his hands): "He not only preached theories but he turned those into actualities and called one of our coreligionists into the Cabinet of the President of the United States, the highest office within his gift. We Jews owe him a debt of gratitude which I earnestly hope will never be forgotten." In reply to this introduction Mr. Roosevelt said that when he called Mr. Straus to the Cabinet he did not consider the question of religion or race; he considered only Mr. Straus's fitness for the office. He did not appoint him either as a German or as a Jew, but simply as a man most fitted for the position, and, possessing those qualities, he was all the more glad to appoint Mr. Straus because he was a Jew. Subsequently it came Mr. Straus's turn to speak, and in introducing him Mr. Schiff said that he was at the White House before Mr. Straus's appointment was made; that Mr. Roosevelt told him that he had decided to appoint Mr. Straus as a member of the

Cabinet; that Mr. Roosevelt asked Mr. Schiff what he thought of the appointment; and that Mr. Schiff replied that there was no one in the Jewish community who was so well fitted to occupy the position, Mr. Straus was in Washington at the time of this conversation, and Mr. Schiff came back to the hotel where Mr. Straus was stopping and told him substantially what is stated above. Mr. Schiff did not state, either at that time or in his introduction of Mr. Straus at the banquet, that Mr. Roosevelt had asked him or had written to ask him what Jew to appoint to the position, but that when Mr. Roosevelt had announced to Mr. Schiff his decision to appoint Mr. Straus, Mr. Schiff then expressed the opinion that no better member of the Jewish community could be selected. We state these facts, not because they are especially important in themselves, but because they illustrate the kind of misrepresentation and misinterpretation which every public man has to endure from newspaper gossipgossip which is sometimes merely unintentionally foolish, and at other times, as we believe is true in this case, maliciously planned to injure. Mr. Roosevelt has had to bear very much more than his fair share of this kind of malicious gossip. If every newspaper would do what the Boston "Post" has done in this case, endeavor to get the facts— an endeavor which in this case The Outlook and Mr. Roosevelt both highly appreciatea long step would be taken towards the eradication of one of the distinct evils of American journalism.

NEW YORK CITY'S GOVERNMENT

Few people realize how big New York City is. In population it is much bigger than the island of Cuba; bigger than the Republic of Colombia or Chile; bigger than the Kingdom of Bulgaria; bigger than all of Greece or the whole Kingdom of Saxony; much bigger than Norway; bigger than Switzerland, which has often been likened to the United States as a Federal republic; bigger than Denmark and all her colonies; indeed, New York City is bigger than Great Britain's great continental colony, Australia. It is not surprising that so imperial a city, with a population not only bigger than that of the countries we have mentioned, but far more complex racially, should find its problems extraordinarily difficult. In the past New York's government has been notorious because of the corruption and inefficiency that it has dis

played, but its government has shown great improvement in recent years. The President of the Bureau of Municipal Research, a society of very exacting standards, is Mr. R. Fulton Cutting. He has made a statement with regard to the specific matters in which that government has shown improvement within the last two years. It will be remembered that two years ago the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, the chief governing power in the greater city, which had been under the control of Tammany Hall, was made free from Tammany domination. Thus, though the Mayor was chosen from the Tammany ticket, the government of the city was liberated from that corrupt political organization. Mr. Cutting has pointed out the achievements under that Board. He registers his approval under seventy-four heads. Over a score of them are instances of improvement in finance and accounting which make for honesty, efficiency, and economy. A number of them are instances of improvement in administration, some of them of great importance; city advertising, for example, having been transformed from "a byword of extravagance and extortion" to "one of the best instances of retrenchment." Some of Mr. Cutting's points relate to the improvement of social conditions under which the people of the city live the improvement of the milk supply, the reduction of infant mortality, the examination of working children, the reduction of dark rooms in tenements, the improvements in dealing with tuberculosis, the inspection of weights and measures, and the like. Mr. Cutting also notes the advance that has been made in planning for the city-for its transportation, for its docks, and the like; and he notes also the broad investigations that have been brought and are bringing knowledge to the people and the officials of the city. Some of the credit for these improvements belongs not only to the Board of Estimate as a whole, but specifically also to the Mayor. On the other hand, there have been certain very serious faults, which Mr. Cutting does not mention, for which the Mayor cannot escape responsibility. The construction of the Catskill Aqueduct, which has been admirably managed, was halted seriously by the Mayor's failure to take necessary action. The planning of the new subways was attended with great difficulty because of the Mayor's uncertainty and vacillation. On the whole, however, the government of New York under present conditions is such as to

In the present very critical and sometimes indiscriminately censorious attitude toward wealth, it is wise to strike the balance by recording in large letters the immense public benefactions, in which the last year surpassed all its predecessors, and made what is technically called a new record in the history of giving since time began. Millions

of dollars were given in this country privately; the gifts that have been made public in one form and another amounted to $260,000,000, and, according to the New York "Sun," more than doubled the amount given in 1910. This great sum was divided between three general objects-individual gifts for individual purposes, individual gifts for educational purposes, and gifts for the advancement of the general well-being of society. The amount devoted to the first object was $160,000,000; to the second, $13,000,000; and to the third, $83,500,000; the balance of $260,000,000 being distributed for a variety of public objects. The foremost gift of the year in point of magnitude was the $25,000,000 passed over by Mr. Carnegie to the Carnegie Corporation of New York for the purpose of advancing the diffusion of knowledge and understanding among the people of the United States; the sum total of the gifts of Mr. Carnegie amounting to more than thirty million dollars. An interesting incident in the history of the beneficence of the year is brought out by the circumstances attending a gift by Dr. Samuel Balla, a descendant of a noble Austrian family, who had become a naturalized American, practicing medicine in Los Angeles. A title descended to him, coupled with an estate valued, it is said, at ten millions. In order to accept the title, Dr. Balla would have been obliged to give up his American citizenship. Putting the two in the balance, he decided that the citizenship was of greater

value. He refused the title, and passed the estate on to hospitals, asylums for the old, the sick, and the infirm, and to municipal homes.

SOME

SPECIAL GIFTS

It has often been said that the poor who suffer most are not those who have always been poor, but those who are in what used to be called "genteel poverty." Some time ago the Queen of Rumania converted a great castle into a home for needy noblewomen. An American lady has established and endowed the Kate Earle Home for Kentucky Gentlewomen at Lexington in that State, which is to provide a proper shelter for elderly women born in prosperous conditions, but who have met financial misfortunes. It is said to be the only home of the kind ever established in this country, a statement which may need some qualification. It is pleasant to note that the unhappy phrase, decayed gentlewomen, once widely in use in England, has not appeared on this side of the ocean. Mr. James Patton has been a leader in the fight against tuberculosis, and last year devoted $4,000,000 to the struggle; $500,000 for the purpose of research work in Mexico into the white plague, its causes and preventives, a large amount for the education and protection of the children of what he calls the "pathetic classes," and $2,000,000 to the Northwestern University for research work in the same general field. Some years ago, as the "Sun" tells the story, a shabby old man visited nearly every hospital and charitable institution in New York, examined the kitchens, and inquired into the details of management and accommodation. Forgetful of the possibility of angels traveling in disguise, he is reported to have been gruffly treated in many places, but the Presbyterian and Hahnemann hospitals showed him the greatest courtesy. His name was Mitchel Valentine, and when he died it was found that he had left his estate of $2,559,514.55 to four institutions, the Hahnemann and Presbyterian Hospitals getting $1,146,826.13 each. This is a very eloquent sermon on the advisability of treating human beings as human beings, and not as the wearers of clothes. It is interesting to note that women's colleges are beginning to receive very large gifts from women, Miss Woerishoffer, who was killed in an automobile accident, bequeathing the great sum of $750,000 to Bryn Mawr. Eighteen Protestant missionary

societies report contributions for the year of $51,000,000, of which amount $11,000,000 were devoted to missionary work abroad. Catholic contributions to Catholic universities and parish schools exceeded $13,000,000. The sense of responsibility for the use of money is evidently deepening, the attitude. of trusteeship is being taken every year by a larger number of persons, and the habit of giving is prevailing to a most promising

extent.

AN

ARTIST PRINCE

The January issue of the "International Studio "-which, by the way, from the point of view of artistic illustrations, is one of the most beautiful and interesting magazines published in the English language-contains an article upon the landscape paintings of Prince Eugen of Sweden. The article is illustrated with admirable reproductions, in black and white and in color, of some of his pictures. We call attention to this article because it will help to correct the not uncommon notion that European kings and princes are wholly occupied with the elegancies and luxuries of a life the main object of which is the pursuit of their own pleasure and power. The fact is that the modern prince or king is one of the most hard-working and hardworked men imaginable. Many of these men are as much absorbed in the administration of the affairs of their kingdoms or principalities as the most tireless Congressman or Senator is absorbed in the political administration of his office. The Emperor of Germany and the King of Italy are notable examples of royal personages who are as constantly occupied with affairs of state, even to the point of having regular office hours, as an American President. In olden times the members of European royal families devoted themselves to the arts of war; to-day there are many who with equal skill and enthusiasm devote themselves to the arts of peace, sociology, the principles of commerce, industrial chemistry and engineering, medicine or poetry, music, and pictorial art. Prince Eugen is a member of a family which has been notable for its love of the arts. His father, King Oscar II of Sweden, was a poet and an orator of real distinction and power; one of his uncles was a talented musician and composer; and he himself is a painter of such gifts that if he had been born a commoner, the world, which is always prone to look upon kings and princes as mere amateurs when they

Even

work outside of their proverbial field of war, would have granted him a high place in the list of accomplished modern painters. in republican America we are willing to admit that there are some advantages in being a king or a prince; but there are also some terrible disadvantages. One is that a royal personage always has the greatest difficulty in getting the world to judge him according to Robert Burns's just principle, "A man's a man for a' that." Prince Eugen is now about fifty-five years of age. He began his studies of art when a young man at the university, and pursued these studies as an art student in Paris. His pictures of the beautiful Stockholm Archipelago would attract unusual and favorable attention in any European or American exhibition of modern paintings. Three pictures which are reproduced by the "International Studio "deserve special mention-"The White Boat,' "The Harbor, Stockholm," and the very poetic. landscape called "The Silent Water." These three pictures show that Prince Eugen is a lover not only of silent nature, but of the stirring and active life of modern industry and commerce. He lives in a villa from which he gets a wonderful view of the shipping and movement of the harbor of Stockholm, one of the most picturesque harbors in the world; and he has perceived the fact which Americans have not altogether yet understood, although they are beginning to appreciate it, that modern commerce may be, and often is, full of beauty and poetry-a truth which the old Venetians did more than any other single European community to reveal to the world. We wish that American citizens of Swedish birth in this country might arrange an exhibition in New York of modern Swedish paintings, in which Prince. Eugen's pictures would naturally take a prominent place, and invite the artist prince to come and open it and see what industrial and democratic America is doing for the development of an art that is truly representative of American life.

worse.

are consumed with curiosity to know what goes on behind that club's closed doors. They suspect gambling, necromancy, and As a result of a series of stratagems accompanied with much gossip, fainting, and screams, they gain access, and find that all is perfectly innocent. They in turn are discovered, but all ends happily in a merry dance. Wolf-Ferrari's music might best be described as being what Mozart's might be if he were suddenly to come to life in this day and attempt the Wagnerian form of opera. It is to the tragic music drama of Wagner what opera bouffe is to the old-time tragic opera such as Gluck's. Wolf-Ferrari's music is altogether delightful. It races along with the aimless and amusing story and illuminates the wit and the fun of it. Whenever the gossip of the over-inquisitive ladies is at its height one hears from the orchestra the unmistakable cackle of the barnyard fowl-albeit a very musical cackle indeed. Throughout the orchestra laughs with the audience. The spirit of kindly satire that runs through the whole piece is well illustrated at the close of the twelfth scene in the last act. Arlecchino (Harlequin), the servant in motley who helps to complicate matters from beginning to end, has finally been prevailed upon, through fear of the ladies' hysterics, to let them into the club, and as the last one of these disappears through the door he picks up his lantern, peers about, and finally, coming to the footlights, most earnestly addresses the audience with the question, "Are there any more who want to come in?" Both "Lobetanz" and Donne Curiose" are new only in the sense that this year they have been heard for the first time in America; but they are both several years old. Both are the works of comparatively young men. Thiele is no longer living. Wolf-Ferrari is still in his prime. He wrote this opera when he was only twenty seven. He is now considerably under forty. He has the boldness of an innovator, but it is the boldness of one who is willing to turn aside from the mad rush after innovation.

"Le

As his opera was being performed on Wednesday of last week he was on his way to this country. As his name implies, his ancestry is both German and Italian, and his music bears the characteristics of the music of both countries from which he has sprung. Both he and Thiele illustrate the point which Felix Weingartner makes in his article printed elsewhere in this issue.