« PredošláPokračovať »
the ocean. He desired to transport a number of passengers and considerable freight without danger even in heavy weather. Greater carrying capacity, speed, and radius of action were his goal. So he gave his balloon a rigid skeleton made of rings and angles of aluminum, and covered it with impregnated cloth. Inside he put the real lifting power-a row of gas-filled ballonets.
In his first experimental balloon, in 1902, he had nine ballonets. His first engines were two Maybach motors of 75 to 100 horsepower each. He could carry over two tons, and had a speed of 60 kilometers (about 40 miles) an hour. The dirigibility of his ship was perfect from the beginning.
In spite of a number of serious accidents, and after sacrificing his fortune, Zeppelin at last conquered public opinion, obtained the support financially of the German people and Government, and went on improving and enlarging his balloons, and making them suitable for service in peace and war.
A modern war Zeppelin may be described as follows: Capacity, 30,000 to 35,000 cubic meters (1,100,000 to 1,300,000 cubic feet); speed, 100 kilometers per hour (62 miles); radius of action, 36 to 40 hours in the air at full speed; height of rising, 3,000 to 3,500 meters (10,000 to 12,000 feet); propelling power, four motors of 125 to 150 horse-power each, connected by belts with the propellers. The two hulls carry two propellers each. A third hull is provided for commander and pilot. An open air-shaft in the center of the balloon affords free vision to the sky. The vertical steering is done mainly by dynamical apparatus, but also by throwing out ballast. Ample provision is made against loss of gas. The gas, when heated by radiation of the sun, is cooled by strong ventilation. The surface of the balloon case is painted with aluminum paint, which keeps it from overheating. The number of gas-filled ballonets inside is from 15 to 17, of which 5 to 7 may be hit by bullets and emptied of their gas without destroying the buoyancy of the whole.
THE ZEPPELIN IN WAR
For military service a Zeppelin may be armed with one or two machine guns, with one or two light rapid-fire guns, and with machinery for dropping bombs. It can carry about a ton and a half of ammunition and
explosives. It is fitted out with a wireless telegraph apparatus with a radius of about two hundred miles.
The Zeppelin air cruiser is well suited for its purpose. While its speed is somewhat less than that of aeroplanes, it can rise very much more quickly. Its main advantage lies in its great radius of action, which enables it to make long scouting flights. Even in cases when it has been brought down by the enemy, the results of its expedition are not lost because of its wireless communication.
In the hulls a number of officers are conveniently and safely carried to make observations, take photographs, and plot maps.
German military authorities express satisfaction with the efficiency of the Zeppelins in the present European war. They have done successful scouting and have certainly inspired the Allies with fear. Some of them are built so that they can be propelled on the surface of the water. The Zeppelin Hensa has successfully descended from the air to the surface of the water and risen again, and great sheds, or hangars, are maintained at Cuxhaven and Heligoland as a basis for both seagoing and land-scouting Zeppelins. At the beginning of the war Germany possessed ten or twelve war Zeppelins ready for active service in her army and navy. There are two great yards for building air-ships at Friedrichshaven and Potsdam, in each of which five dirigibles can be under construction at the same time. It takes from two to three months under present circumstances to build a Zeppelin, and before long Germany will have fifty such air-vessels at her command. While Germany has given her attention chiefly to the development and building of dirigibles of the Zeppelin type, she has not wholly neglected the construction and use of aeroplanes, and many monoplanes and biplanes are employed for scouting duties by the different German armies, each of which has its own Flieger Corps. But the building of flying-machines or aeroplanes, as contrasted with the dirigibles, is believed by the Germans to be still in its infancy.
DISSENSION IN MEXICO
The confused and uncertain state of affairs in Mexico continued last week. General Carranza's resignation, offered to the congress or convention of military leaders at Mexico City, was a mere formality, not to say a stage-play, and, of course, was immediately
refused. Villa's faction was not represented. Attempts are still going on as we write to bring the two Constitutionalist leaders into harmony, and their representatives have planned a conference at Aguas Calientes. The prospect is not hopeful, as Villa insists that neither Carranza nor any other military leader shall become Provisional President...
At the Mexico City conference Carranza proposed a programme of reforms for Mexico which is thus summarized in the press reports :
Assurance of municipal liberty; division of national lands and of lands which the Government may purchase from large holders; expropriation of lands in the vicinity of municipalities of five hundred population or more, the proceeds to be used in erecting schools, markets, and court-houses; obliging all large business interests to pay weekly and in coin all their employees; limitation of hours of labor and of Sunday work; workmen's compensation laws for injuries; just taxation of land; tariff laws intended to help the poorer classes; importation of necessaries such as the country does not cultivate, and reformation of banking laws to permit the establishment of State banks; marriage to be made a civil contract; divorce laws; betterment of the working classes.
This is apparently a good programme in itself, speaking generally, although it must be remembered that all Mexican party leaders,, including even Huerta, have been profuse in paper promises for reforms. We note particularly as a promising sign that Carranza proposes purchase and expropriation (by something approaching our condemnation proceedings when land is taken for public purposes) instead of the outright confiscation of land which the opponents of the Constitutionalists have declared would follow the success of that party.
In an editorial on politics in the Central West published in The Outlook of September 9 the statement was made that the Wisconsin Democrats had chosen as their candidate for Governor John A. Aylward, progressive Democrat, in preference to his conservative opponent, Judge John C. Karel. In this statement The Outlook was mistaken. The Wisconsin primaries were held on September 1, and on September 2, the day on which the number of The Outlook containing the editorial in question went to press, it was conceded by many political observers and newspaper editors that Karel had been de
good purpose. Factory whistles are not necessary; the ringing of bells and the blowing of the whistles of the locomotives is more than half an expression of individual inclination. Motors go shrieking along the roads and are often silent at the places where they ought to sound the signal of approach.
Those who live in suburban towns and who belong to the commuter class are the victims of both kinds of noises, and the New York "Evening Sun" has undertaken a useful work in the endeavor to secure both from railway officials and from passengers some expression of opinion as to how much noise is needed and what can be done to relieve its pressure. Years ago when the elevated roads were opened in New York City there were many suggestions in regard to possible ways of diminishing the noise. made by the rushing trains. One correspondent of a newspaper proposed that the noise should be gathered during the day in large boxes and emptied down the harbor at night like other garbage. This was interesting, but hardly practicable.
In a recent issue of The Outlook an account was given of the democratic, efficient, and sympathetic way in which the New York.
Compensation Law is being applied by the Compensation Commission. Our attention has been called by a lawyer of standing to an error of statement in our account-an error which does not at all affect the main purpose of that account, but which is in itself of some importance. Careful examination of the Compensation Law confirms our correspondent's assertion that we were incorrect in stating that an injured employee who has made his claim for compensation through the Commission had still the right to take his case into the courts, and that a defeat at law would not prejudice him in applying to the Commission later. This is true only in the very limited number of cases (if there are any) where the employer fails to insure the payment of compensation for his injured employees under one of the four methods prescribed in the Act. Otherwise the payment of compensation through the Commission is the exclusive remedy of the employee. This applies not only to the New York law but to most compensation laws, and is a part of the purpose of such laws to simplify the procedure and to secure the compensation directly and easily.
There may be one or sory compensation laws abroad or in other States which allow both remedies, but the authorities on this subject consider that to allow the workmen to attempt to collect damages in two ways is more than doubtful and undesirable. The theory of the Workmen's Compensation Law in New York as well as in other States is that it is a compromise arrangement-that is, the employer gives up his so-called common-law defenses of assumption of risk, contributory negligence, and the fellow-servant doctrine, and in return therefor the employee gives up all right of action at law. In fact, as our correspondent points out, one of the great merits of a compulsory compensation law, such as that of New York State, is that the great bulk of master and servant litigation which has taken up the time of the courts for years is eliminated.
One consequence of this elimination and of the human and direct methods of the Commission has been, as we have already pointed out, to spoil the wretched practice of the socalled "ambulance chasers"-unprincipled lawyers who instigate damage suits, often unjustly, practically blackmail the employers into paying, and appropriate to themselves a large part of the damages which the employee should have.
THE GERMAN PEOPLE AND THE WAR
Most Americans are loth to believe that the German armies that have overrun Belgium and have invaded France went forth two months ago at the bidding of the German people. They do not believe in Germany's cause, but they have always had reason to believe in Germany's people. They have therefore not wished to identify a cause which they believed unjustified with a people for whom they have nothing but friendship.
Many things have operated to establish friendly relationship between the people of the United States and the people of Germany. Not only are a large proportion of Americans themselves of German descent or German birth, but that German element in the American population has contributed distinctive qualities of character to the Nation. Historical tradition has also contributed to this feeling of friendliness, for the people of the United States have never been in conflict with the Germans, as they have with the French and the English and the Spanish, except as they fought the Hessian hirelings of the English King in the Revolutionary War; and, on the other hand, Baron Steuben in the Revolutionary War and the German regiments in the Civil War have helped to fight American battles. These are only some of the reasons why the American people wish to think well of the German people, and why at this time they have instinctively attributed the present war, not to the German people as a whole, but to the bureaucrats, the militarists, the Crown Prince, and the Kaiser.
The fact, which has been established by the testimony of Americans returning from Germany, that the German people were participating in the war with earnestness and with devotion to their Fatherland caused no surprise, for Americans well know that any people in the position in which the Germans have been placed would fight with the same spirit. The question which is not answered by American travelers who testify to the German war enthusiasm is, Who was responsible for placing the German people in that position? Most Americans believe that the responsibility rests upon the military oligarchy.
It is the non-military German whose point of view the American wishes to understand. This point of view is well presented by some striking testimony on behalf of Germany
(THE GERMAN PEOPLE AND THE WAR
which we propose to consider in this article. This testimony comprises five separate things, namely:
Hugo Münsterberg's book, just published, entitled "The War and America." Professor Münsterberg is of Harvard. He is a friend of the Kaiser. He identifies himself with the believers in peace. He repudiates the doctrine of the Pan-Germanists.
A pamphlet entitled "Truth about Germany: Facts about the War." This appears under the auspices of an honorary committee, among whose members are Herr Ballin, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Hamburg-American Line; Prince von Bülow, former Chancellor of Germany; Dr. Dryander, of Berlin; Professor von Harnack, of Berlin, famous Biblical scholar; Dr. Lamprecht, of Leipsic; Siegfried Wagner, the son of the great composer; Professor Wundt, famous as a psychologist; Baroness Speck von Sternburg, the widow of the late German Ambassador to the United States.
Prince Bernhard von Bülow's book entitled "Imperial Germany," which has appeared in an English translation and now has been published in French form. Prince von Bülow is not a warrior, though he is a great admirer of Bismarck, and believes that Germany has been forced into the arena of Weltpolitik.
Dr. Bernhard Dernburg, whose letters published in the New York" Sun" and the New York "Times" have been models of courteous argument.
A leaflet, addressed "To the Evangelical Christians Abroad," signed by thirty-one religious leaders of Germany, including Professors Eucken, Harnack, and Dryander.
All this testimony supports the belief that the German people are united with their rulers, and, with the exception of Prince von Bülow's book, which was written before the war, all agree that the German people are a unit in upholding the war.
The pamphlet entitled "The Truth about Germany" explains that this must be so, because the German army "draws its strength and life-blood from all classes of the whole German folk," and therefore "can develop its entire strength only in a war which the folk approve."
In a summary of General von Bernhardi's book "Germany and the Next War" The Outlook has recently given to its readers the interpretation of Germany's spirit and purpose from the point of view of the Prussian war party. Dr. Münsterberg, Prince von Bülow, Dr. Dernburg, and the authors of the
pamphlet and leaflet we have referred to undertake to interpret Germany's spirit and purpose from the point of view of non-military Germany. We shall give their interpretation as fairly as we can in the space available.
Germany is naturally peaceful. For fortyfour years it has remained at peace with all other nations. During this time of peace Germany has made an enormous advance. In commerce it has progressed more rapidly than the greatest of commercial nations-Great Britain. In social progress it
has set standards for the rest of the world by its laws for the economic advantage of the working people, by its development of agriculture, and by its administration of cities. In music its supremacy is generally recognized, and its contribution to all art is acknowledged by other nations. In science it is supreme. For such an advance
as this peace is essential. Even a successful war would halt this progress and destroy much of what Germany has achieved. Every German has recognized that war would sweep Germany's commerce from the seas, arrest its industries, paralyze its efforts for science and art. Naturally, therefore, the Germans value
But Germany is surrounded by enemies. secretly plotting against her. On one side is Russia, nursing Pan-Slavic ambitions; on another side is France, cherishing revenge for 1870; and lying off her ports is England, jealous of her commercial progress. "Emperor and nation," says Professor Münsterberg, are one in the knowledge that Germany is surrounded by peoples whose racial hatred would crush Germany to the ground if it could not fight at an instant's notice." "Let us consider the adversaries of Germany," says the "Truth about Germany." "Russia, the classic land of power and terrible exploitation of the people for the benefit of a degenerated aristocracy. France, a type of a nation in which there is not even enough enterprise to increase the productiveness of the country. England, which has so long felt its glory vanishing, and in the meantime has remained far behind its younger rival in financial and economic equipment. One can easily imagine the feelings of these peoples when they observe the rapid and successful growth of Germany." The same idea of conspiracy against Germany is expressed by the writers of the letter "To the Evangelical Christians Abroad" when they say: "No
scruple holds back our enemies where, in their opinion, there is a prospect, through our destruction, of seizing for themselves an economic advantage or an increase of power, a fragment of our motherland, our colonial possessions, or our trade.”
Thus surrounded, Germany is compelled to keep her sword sharp and close at hand. It is the fear of her enemies conspiring against her that has made of every German a soldier and of her Emperor a War Lord. In fact, the very progress that she has made in the arts of peace gives added reason for her achievement in the art of war. Since she is the trustee for culture, she is bound to protect herself.
The real dualism, as Professor Münsterberg points out, is not between the Emperor or the war party and the nation, but between these two interests within every German life. "It is," says he, "the contrast between the ideal values and the earthly power and success, the contrast between cultural unfolding and practical efficiency, between the legacies of Goethe and of Bismarck."
And he says of the Germans, "Their old traditions of a life devoted to idealistic culture conflict too strongly with the life yearning for powerful external civilization." Prince von Bülow exemplifies this dualism in his book. His main interest is in the agricultural and industrial development of Germany, but he declares that Germany must always be prepared for war. He writes of this conflict between the peaceful and the military interests of Germany with irritation.
It is because the people themselves feel that Germany must make her way against her foes that they trust their Kaiser and their military chiefs. "We have been forced to become a nation of soldiers," says the "Truth about Germany," "in order to be free. And we are bound to follow our Kaiser, because he symbolizes and represents the unity of our nation."
This feeling on the part of Germans is the result of a long process of education. They "have been brought up under the shadow of the feeling that revengeful neighbors were waiting for the hour to burn their villages and their towns." This dread every German has known from his childhood days. Professor Münsterberg testifies that his conscious life begins with a vivid image of Hussars returning from the Austro-Prussian War, that his first writing was a childish poem about war, and that when he was a student at Heidel
berg there was no other talk "but the war which the French restlessness would force upon us." So the Germans have been brought up to exalt the Fatherland. To this end they have been taught to subordinate thought of self and to be willing to die—even glad to die—that Germany shall extend her influence. In all her people there has thus been latent what a correspondent of Professor Münsterberg praises as the furor Teutonicus, inspired by the ideas of "the great time which created the German Empire ;" and every German has felt, as this same correspondent says, "that in this war the existence of Germany as a cultural world energy was at stake." The logical outcome of this is that the Germans, even in America, are roused to show what Professor Münsterberg calls "a crushing power of which the reckless torch-bearers of German hatred did not dream."
In this, however, Germany lays no blame upon her foes, for to each one of them she concedes the moral right to do what they have done to advance their interests if they can. It is put in this way by Professor Münsterberg:
If two men love the same woman, neither of them is wrong, and yet only one can possess her. If two nations grow, there may be conflicting needs of expansion; both may need a strip of land, a harbor, an island, an outlet to the coast, if they are to develop their resources. Neither Russia nor Japan was in the wrong when their wholesome growth led them to mutual interference. No tribunal of the world can find in such cases a decision, because it is no question of right. Both parties are equally on moral ground, and the source of the conflict is only the scarcity of the available land, in sharp contrast to the unlimited goods which the individuals covet. Then strength alone can bring a final decision.
In other words, among nations there is only one law that really counts-the law of the jungle. This is avowed, be it remembered, by one who in another place repudiates the "fantastic dream of the so-called Pan-Germanists." This, however, is the essence of Pan-Germanism.
As a consequence, it is not surprising to find in these spokesmen for non-military Germany the same view of treaties and of other international obligations that we find in Bernhardi. The pamphlet "The Truth about Germany" acknowledges that the invasion. of Belgium was a "breach of neutrality," but