menace of the increasing prevalence of the drug habit. One probable beneficial result of the passage of the Boylan Law will be the passage of similar laws in neighboring States, for, if these States do not thus protect themselves, they will become the dumping-ground for the "drug fiends" of New York's underworld forced to flee from that State. Before State legislation on this subject can reach its greatest effectiveness, however, Congress must act. The State experts who have studied the drug problem say that it is "absolutely essential that an accurate accounting should be made to the Federal Government of all importation, manufacture, and interState traffic in habit-forming drugs."

TURKEY AND THE WAR

Turkey's participation in the world war would seem at first sight to be the supreme act of folly.

Once a great Empire, Turkey threatened to overwhelm Europe with Mohammedan ideas, manners of life, and type of character. The Turkish Empire attained power the extent of which it is hard for us of the twentieth century to imagine. Professor Hart's article on "The Sultans," which is printed in this issue of The Outlook, recounts graphically the rise of that great power. Turkey of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was the great exemplar of Machtpolitik-the doctrine that "might makes right "-and Turkey's policy of power was reinforced and sustained by the Mohammedan religion. To the resistance against the Turks maintained through generations by the peoples of eastern Europe we owe to-day what we have of European civilization and what we have of free institutions. Gradually the Turk was driven back, and for years he retained his Empire solely on the sufferance of those European Powers that found it to their own advantage to keep him on the throne. Then came the Balkan War, and not even the self-interest of the European Powers could save Turkish dominion in Europe from crumbling almost to the point of utter destruction. The Turkish Empire is scarcely a shadow of its former self. So wretched has it become that its only defense has been, in fact, its utter weakWhy should such a nation allow itself to be flung into a conflict which may involve the ruin even of mighty Powers?

ness.

It would seem, perhaps, as if by flattery and

by promises Turkey had been persuaded to lend itself to German schemes. There has been no secret concerning Germany's ambition in the East and consequent effort to influence Turkey. The proverbial wealth of the Orient can be approached by Germany only on a route that passes through what is or has been Turkish territory. The same Kaiser who has issued his warning against the yellow peril of Asia has been willing to employ to the interest of the policies of his own Empire the power of Asia which is nearest to Europe.

There are reasons, however, which might well have influenced Turkey in deciding to enter the European conflict when the situation is seen from the Turkish point of view. For years the hunter has been hunted; the Turkish Empire that once was aggressive has been furtively seeking protection against the aggression of others. For more than a hundred years Turkey has expected and dreaded an invasion from Russia. That great Slavic Empire, tardily emerging from mediævalism and retaining primitive virtues with primitive defects, has sought an outlet to the common highway of the sea. natural course has been to find that way to the Mediterranean by way of Constantinople. It was this southward pressure of the Russian forces that was resisted by England, France, Sardinia, and Turkey in the Crimean War. It was this same southward pressure that was resisted successfully by Bismarck at the making of the Treaty of Berlin, when Russia was compelled after 1878 to forfeit the best fruits of its campaign. As a matter of fact, the boundary line in the Caucasus has been forced southwards after each war, and the Turks have felt the ominous pressure. Even with the Bosphorus in the enemy's hands, Odessa has become the greatest seaport of Russia. Moreover, apart from the natural desire for an open way to the Mediterranean, there has been actuating Russia a religious feeling. Constantinople, in its origin and early history a Christian city and the seat of the Eastern Church, seems to be inviting the head of one branch of that Church, the Russian Czar, to come back to his own, and to win once more for Christendom Constantinople and its historic churches. So during the nineteenth century, while Russia has been expanding, the Turkish territories have been contracting on every side. The Turks have thus been made to feel that some time these aggressions must be checked. Encouraged by the fact that Japan, an Asiatic

nation, was able to defeat Russia, Turkey has come to believe that surely Allah would enable the Turkish armies to beat back the Muscovites and would strengthen the borders of the Empire of Islam.

And not only on the Russian side has Turkey felt its losses and its perils, but it also has been forced to see its power and influence wane through the domination of Egypt by England, of Morocco by France, and of Tripoli by Italy.

Of all the nations in Europe there is now but one which appears in the guise of a savior to Turkey. This has been the German Empire. The Turks have not forgotten the Kaiser's speech at Damascus in the nineties after he had visited the tomb of Salah-ed-din. He declared himself the protector of Ottoman and Mohammedan interests. In Baalbek he caused a marble tablet to be erected, commemorating his Imperial progress through the country and the restoration of the Roman ruins. The same year a treaty was signed authorizing the building of a railway from Constantinople to Bagdad by a German-controlled company. Neither have the Turks forgotten what the German Ambassador said at Constantinople toward the close of the Balkan War. Speaking to the Germania Club, he said: "Whatever may be determined as the possessions of the European provinces of Turkey, the time has now come when the Fatherland may attach to the Asiatic provinces the warning, 'Touch me not.'"

These emphatic hints to the other nations of Europe have aroused hopes in the hearts of the Turks that with Germany's aid the losses of the Italian and Balkan wars might be retrieved.

And now they see their hereditary enemy, Russia, occupied in a war with this German Empire that has announced itself to be the protector of Mohammedan interests. They see England, the overlord in the former Turkish territory of Egypt, and France, a master in the Mohammedan region of northern Africa, arrayed also against this German protector of Islam and the Ottoman interests. Italy, Turkey's recent enemy, and Greece, the conqueror of Turkish islands and Turkish mainland, Turkey likewise sees in sympathy with the enemies of its German ally. And the opportunity seems ripe from one point of view of confounding these ancient foes by joining with the great War Lord and his mighty forces. The spirit of the German military leader seems kindred with that

573

ancient aggressive spirit of the Turkey that once made Europe tremble. The Machtpolitik of Germany in the twentieth century is perhaps appealing to an element in the Turkish Empire that remembers what the Turks were in the fifteenth century.

There has been, too, the bond of financial interest between Turkey and Germany.

It is, then, perhaps not unnatural that the military party in Turkey, who glory in Turkey's past prestige, should listen to German promises and German advice, and find it natural to enter into this war on Germany's side. And it is the military Turk who is in power in Turkey to-day. There is ample evidence to show that the man whose personality dominates the situation in Turkey to-day is Enver Pasha, who is better known as Enver Bey. Last spring, in recognition of his services to the nation, he was made a Pasha by the decree of the Sultan. His early training was in the German military schools, and for some time he served as military attaché in the Turkish Embassy at Berlin. His mind became saturated with German ideas and methods, and upon his return to Turkey he ardently advocated everything German. Enver Bey and Niazi Bey carried through the remarkably rapid movements of the revolution of July, 1908, compelling Sultan Abdul-Hamid to grant a constitution, and establishing the Committee of Union and Progress as the ruling power in Ottoman affairs. These men became the popular heroes, the defenders of the liberties and rights of the fatherland. Young, spirited, energetic, and intensely patriotic, these two men dominated the current of events. Through a treacherous plot Niazi Bey was shot. Mahmoud Shevket Pasha, another strong leader who was serving as Minister of War, was assassinated. These facts have made Enver Bey, now Pasha, all the more the hero of the army and of the nation. He has become the powerful head of the war party in the Cabinet, and as War Minister may have the final word in deciding Turkey's action. During these days of high tension he has been escorted constantly by six officers with revolvers ready for use. He is supported by a group of high-spirited, able army officers, and by those Cabinet members, like Talaat Bey, who are conspicuously identified with the Committee of Union and Progress-that is, with the Young Turk party.

It is these aggressive Young Turks who

brought about the reforms of a few years ago that were hailed as a sign of Turkey's regeneration. It is these Young Turks who a few weeks ago announced the abrogation of the so-called Capitulations-those privileges allowed to foreigners which have made the Turks feel that they were inferiors in the sight of the other nations. The spirit that brought about those earlier reforms and the spirit that has impelled the Turks to abrogate these Capitulations is the same-the desire to raise Turkey to a higher place of respect. As one of the leading dailies of Constantinople, the "Tanin," in an editorial on September 10, said: "The Capitulations were to us an outrage and a humiliation and a means to the most dangerous misery, at a time when all other nations were going ahead. . . . To-day we are happy; for the Government has wiped out the ancient black stain. Henceforth we are free; we can labor and progress like the rest of the race. Henceforth the Westerner must pay taxes like ourselves; he will be amenable to the same law courts; in short, we can say henceforth that we too are men! The date that marks the ending of the system of Capitulations should be celebrated equally with July 23 [the day of the 1908 revolution]. Our sons must keep the day, and always remember that their fathers on September 9 definitely emancipated the fatherland. Long live free Turkey !"

It is this same spirit that has impelled the military element in the Young Turk party toward open co-operation with Germany in this war. It is true that the Young Turk party is divided into two factions, the one interested mainly in internal reforms, the other interested mainly in outward prestige. But both factions are animated by the common purpose of raising Turkey in the ranks of the nations.

It must not be supposed, however, that Turkey is a unit in this. The great mass of the Turkish people are not interested in national prestige, just as they were not inter ested in the internal reforms. They know little about the issues in this war. One thing, however, they do know. They know the hardships of military service, and to-day they are suffering from the hardships of mobilization. There are, it is reported, at the present time more men under arms than at any time during the Balkan War. There are thousands without food. Soldiers in camp coming supplied with rations for five

days have gone twice that length of time without new supplies of food. American missionaries have helped to feed the starving troops. There is, therefore, the best of reasons why the Turkish people, apart from Enver Pasha's following, do not wish

war.

And yet there are influences at work to bring popular support, if we may use that term of such a country as Turkey, to the policies of the war party. Although economic conditions in Turkey are at a bad pass, and although the grip of the Mohammedan religion is not as strong on the minds of the people as it once was, the stroke of diplomacy by which the Capitulations were abrogated was of the sort to enlist enthusiasm and patriotism; and while patriotism ran high and the Ambassadors were puzzled by this declaration of independence from the Porte, it was not difficult to get the Deputies in the Turkish Parliament to vote funds for mobilization. Moreover, the German promises were plausible. In providing for the building of the Bagdad Railway Germany has been acute. In order to persuade the Turks that this road was not a foreign incursion, articles were inserted in the German-Turkish treaty stating that after ninety-nine years the road should pass into the hands of the Turkish Government, and that from the first the name of the road should be the Ottoman Imperial Bagdad Railway. Then, too, the Turkish war party believes that if now Turkey goes with Germany at the hour of need, Germany in gratitude will not ride rough-shod over Turkey's national rights and aspirations, but will recognize Turkey as an ally, to be honored and perpetuated as a nation.

Thus Turkey is divided in sentiment and purpose. On the one hand, Enver Pasha and the military party trust in German promises, and hope that by entering into the war Turkey will at least be enabled to maintain some semblance of sovereignty in her present territory and perhaps regain something of what she has lost. On the other side is the Grand Vizier, who is opposed to the war, and has sought to prevent what he regards as a catastrophe. Finally, Turkey is on the edge of bankruptcy. It has been finally voted, for example, by the Deputies in Parliament to divert the entire appropriation for education for the coming year to pay the interest on the loan contracted to meet the Balkan War expenditures. On the one side Turkey sees the oncoming power of Russia.

1914

On the other side she sees a possible refuge in the promises and inducements of Germany.

There ought to be no surprise, therefore, that Turkey's entrance into the war should be signalized by hesitation and contradiction. The once great Ottoman Empire may be said to be at its wits' ends.

By going into this war it would seem almost certain that Turkey had signed her own death warrant. But if she were not to go into the war, what chance of life would there be for her? Rather than have other nations sign her death warrant, perhaps she has chosen to sign it herself.

THE PRESIDENT AND THE ELECTION

The elections throughout the country last week unmistakably register a setback for the Democratic party. In different localities there were different subsidiary causes for this repulse. In New York State, for example, thousands of voters were, in our judgment, actuated by a desire to strike Tammany Hall and ignored what the effect would be on the National Administration. Connecticut and Pennsylvania, and to some extent the President's own State of New Jersey, are manufacturing States which have always been peculiarly susceptible to the appeal of a high tariff. It may further be said by those. who contended that the repulse does not imply a serious Democratic defeat that there always is in the middle of the term of a new President a reaction against him.

But the reduction of a Democratic majority in Congress of nearly one hundred and fifty to the slenderest of margins can be explained only by the fact that the country at large was determined to record its protest against some policy of the Administration.

We believe that it is the policy and attitude of the President and his Administration towards business, or, if you choose, "big business," which has thus been singled out for protest. The Outlook has steadily protested against it since the inauguration of Mr. Wilson in 1913, as is indicated by the following letter received some time before the election from a correspondent in Minnesota : For several years I have been a firm believer in The Outlook. For a long time I have denied the contention of several of my friends that The Outlook was no longer an impartial paper in whose columns one could look with all confidence for guidance, and that it was now noth

575

ing more than the prejudiced organ of a political party; but I can deny this contention no longer.

I believe I can truthfully state that the greater part of the people of this city have a deep admiration for President Wilson. They feel that his fight is their fight and his enemies are their enemies. Believing this, what shall one do who finds foremost among these enemies The Outlook? Surely he can at least register his wish that The Outlook become again the advocate of principles per se and not per any one political party. He can protest against the use of the columns of the paper he honors for the purpose of insidiously attempting to destroy an ennobling influence which a great man has justly earned over the hearts and minds of the American people.

We share in the admiration of our correspondent for President Wilson's personality and character. He is a man of unquestioned integrity, intellectual superiority, and genuine patriotism. But his attitude of mind and his official action with regard to industry and business have already brought the country into serious difficulties, and, if pursued, are likely to bring us into difficulties still greater.

Mr. Wilson appears to believe-certainly his policies are based on the belief-that big business men are to be considered guilty until they are proved innocent; that combinations in business, sometimes miscalled trusts, are evil and indefensible; and that they should be broken up into their component parts or small units.

Is this interpretation of Mr. Wilson's view unjust? Consider the following passages from Chapters IX and XI of Mr. Wilson's "The New Freedom," published only a year ago, and up to the present moment uncontradicted by him :

We have come to be one of the worst-ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world-no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant

men.

If the Government is to tell big business men how to run their business, then don't you see that big business men have to get closer to the Government even than they are now? Don't you see that they must capture the Government, in order not to be restrained too much by it? Must capture the Government? They have already captured it.

What most of us are fighting for is to break up this very partnership [that is, the industrial

Commission proposed by the Progressive party] between big business and the Government. We call upon all intelligent men to bear witness that if this plan were consummated [that is, the plan to regulate industrial combinations] the great employers and capitalists of the country would be under a more overpowering temptation than ever to take control of the Government and keep it subservient to their purpose.

We ought, nevertheless, to realize the seriousness of our situation. That seriousness consists, singularly enough, not in the malevolence of the men who preside over our industrial life, but in their genius and in their honest thinking. These men believe that the prosperity of the United States is not safe unless it is in their keeping. If they were dishonest, we might put them out of business by law; since most of them are honest, we can put them out of business only by making it impossible for them to realize their genuine convictions. I am not afraid of a knave. I am not afraid of a rascal. I am afraid of a strong man who is wrong, and whose wrong thinking can be impressed upon other persons by his own force of character and force of speech.

The small men of this country are not deluded, and not all of the big business men of this country are deluded. . . . And we-we who are not great captains of industry or business-shall do them more good than we do now, even in a material way.

The reasonable interpretation of these passages is that the President discriminates between the big business man and the small business man, between the "great captains of industry or business and the rest of us." With this policy of class discrimination in industry and business we wholly disagree, and the result of the election leads us to believe that the number of those who share in this disagreement is increasing.

Badness is not a necessary element of bigness. A big business man may be one of the most efficient and useful of citizens. The whole tendency of civilization is towards combination and co-operation, and no amount of legislation, however sincere and well meant, can force us back into the bygone era of competitive individualism. Industrial combinations may be of the greatest public service. They should be regulated and controlled, not destroyed. The country, we believe, wishes strict regulation, but it wishes impartial regulation. This, it seems to us, is the chief lesson of the election.

SHALL AMERICAN CHILDREN PAY FOR THE WAR?

The Chicago "Daily News" prints two pictures which convey the very essence of the tragedy of the war. In the upper picture war is represented by a massive figure with a treasure chest in front of him to which poor peasants are bringing their coins, with the figures $55,000,000 a day. Below is a picture of an army of children embarking for the United States, and over them is the placard, "War debt, $???,000,000,000, to be paid by the coming generation."

That is only part of the story-the European part. There is an American part also ; for the war has touched, or will touch, the pocket of every man, woman, and child in America. It has diminished income; it has vastly increased obligation. Every country in Europe holds out invisible hands of need to this country; and this generous, fruitful continent has no choice nor desire save to respond to the utmost. It has been the ideal of America to be the helper of the human race, and now in the most direct way it has the greatest opportunity in its history. Every American ought to feel it not only a duty but a joy to help Europe in this fearful crisis ; but a good many people are saying that the demand for help for those who are actually suffering must take precedence of all other needs, and that money must be diverted from educational uses in this country to feed the starving peoples' abroad. In other words, American children must pay for the European war.

Is it just to lay this appalling burden on the children in America, who must depend for education and care on the generosity of the country? Is it fair to make the poor children of America pay the price of lessened opportunity for education? Must they, too, bear this load in the years to come? No. Not one dollar ought to be withdrawn from the support of schools and institutions which are caring for American children; not one donor to this pressing need ought to withdraw his support in this crisis. Here, for instance, is the New York Kindergarten Association, spending nearly eighty thousand dollars a year to take the children of the slums out of the street and in the most sensitive and critical years sow the seeds of integrity, decency, and intelligence in their lives. Ought these children to pay for the European war? There are thousands of children in charitable