Obrázky na stránke


skirmishing ground. The crossed the geographical frontier in the neighborhood of Nancy. The French are on German territory in Alsace. But from the military view-point neither country has yet been "entered."

A glance at the map which we publish in this issue shows the difference between the political and military frontiers of eastern Germany. The Russian army is on German soil, but it has not really entered Germany until it has crossed the line made by the fortresses of Danzig, Dirschau, Gradenz, and Thorn. Before the central Russian army, operating from Warsaw, can threaten Berlin, it must break through the defenses-hardly less strong-of Thorn, Posen, and Glogau. A Russian advance from the south through Austria will have to deal with Neisse and Glatz.

Siege operations have become increasingly important in modern warfare. The most

serious resistance made by the Russians in the Japanese War was from behind the walls of Port Arthur. And the Russian General Stoessel was court-martialed for surrendering prematurely. In the Balkans the allies easily defeated the Turks whenever they encountered them in the open. Adrianople, Janina, and Scutari held out for months, and were finally taken at immense cost. The lines of Tchatalja successfully defended Constantinople. But none of these fortifications could compare with the strongholds of central Europe which must be reduced.

Namur and Huy are the only cases of modern fortifications being captured in a short time; and no details of their fall have yet reached us. As we go to press the fate of Liège is uncertain, but at least it held out for three weeks. The consensus of opinion is that Germany is better equipped with siege artillery than are the other belligerents. The speed with which Huy and Namur were reduced adds weight to this belief.

By the end of the third week, Belgium is the only country involved whose military frontiers have been passed.


reported to have sent 50,000 men against a garrison of less than 5,000. Japan is the only one of the belligerents that has faced the problem of besieging modern fortifications. Her experience before Port Arthur should be of great value.


The most interesting development of the week for those who believe in the People's Rule is the publication of the British and German "White Papers," containing the diplomatic correspondence which led up to this crisis and the speeches by the King, the Kaiser, the Czar, and President Poincaré, and their Prime Ministers-all with the evident intent of persuading the world that this is a defensive war. Neither the French President nor the German Kaiser can go to war without persuading his nation that it is a righteous cause.

History does not give us any evidence that Alexander or Hannibal or Cæsar wasted any effort persuading their people that their campaigns were justified. Louis XIV, who could say "L'état, c'est moi," did not need to find an ethical basis for his wars of aggression. Napoleon was wont to start a campaign without telling the French people who was the enemy.

One of the first cases of a government definitely taking consideration of public opinion before going to war was when Bismarck in 1870 altered the famous Ems telegram so. that the Germans would believe that they were attacked.

In this present crisis every Government has felt it necessary to be backed by a united public opinion. Whether the German, the Russian, the Austrian, and the English Governments have been frank in their efforts to convince their people that they were attacked does not matter. All of them have succeeded. There are very few soldiers in Europe who consider themselves aggressors; all with equal devotion are fighting-or think they are fighting-to defend their countries from attack.

The important thing is that even the Czar has felt it necessary to persuade his people that his cause is just. No king in Europe dares to call out his army in a frankly aggressive war. New York, August 26.

Other articles in this issue dealing with the war are: "England in Time of War" (editorial correspondence from Mr. Ernest Hamlin Abbott); "The Germans and the War" (two articles, by Mr. Frederic William Wile, of the London "Mail," and

Professor Parmelee, of the College of the City of New York); "War Issues in Russia and the Far East," by George Kennan; "An American Woman Flees from Paris;" "The Outlook Readers' View of the War" (extracts from many letters); "War Notes ;" and the editorials, "Fighting for the Mastery," "1870-1914," and Why?" We shall print next week the best statement which we have seen in defense of the righteousness of the German cause. It is by an American, formerly a student in a German university, now actively engaged in the International Student movement, and a sincere sympathizer with German culture and the German people. He was in Germany at the outbreak of the war, and sends from London his defense of the German spirit at our request.—THE Editors.



Beginning with this issue the date of publication of The Outlook will hereafter be Wednesday instead of Saturday. This change is made to facilitate the work of going to press with the latest possible news of the war.

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

written and published before the present European war broke out, but it has nevertheless a war significance because it shows in a very clear way the industrial domination and prosperity which Germany has risked destroying for the sake of pursuing military domination. The area of Germany, Mr. Scott points out, with its 208,000 square miles, is about equal to Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan. She has an average population of 311 to the square mile. The United States has a population of 32 to the square mile. The result of this intensive population is that Germany has applied her wonderful scientific research to the problem of intensive cultivation. In the thirty-two years between 1881. and 1913, Germany increased her production per acre of wheat eighty-six per cent, of rye seventy-five per cent, of oats eighty-one per cent, of potatoes forty-seven per cent. On the other hand, the production per acre of these food essentials in the United States remained practically stationary. This is partially explained by the steady bringing into the agricultural field of undeveloped lands in this country.

Mr. Scott readily admits that in the United States such intensive cultivation as is recorded by these German statistics is at present impossible in the United States; "but," he adds, "the German figures are interesting to us as showing what can be done by a diligent nation on a naturally poor soil in a rigorous climate."



It is not merely in agriculture that Germany has made wonderful strides by applying the researches of the scientific laboratory to the daily work of commercial production. In the production of pig iron Germany to-day stands second in the civilized world, with an output of seventeen million tons. Her native ore is poor, and yet by scientific methods she produces one-fourth of the total pig iron of the world, surpassing England by over fifty per cent annually. This extraordinary production is largely aided by a chemical process which dephosphorizes the ore, and the phosphate by-product is used as an agricultural fertilizer. By the application of science to industry Germany has not only increased her domestic welfare, but has enormously added to her foreign trade. In twenty-five years. her foreign trade has increased one hundred and eighty-five per cent.

The highest on her list, the product in which she has advanced most, from 1883 to 1912, is machinery of all kinds. The value in marks in 1887 of machinery exported was 52,800,000 marks; in 1912 it had risen to 630,300,000 marks. Coarse and fine iron goods rose from 96,000,000 marks in 1887 to 581,000,000 in 1912. Coalnow think of it-coal from that small country, from 79,900,000 marks to 436,600,000 marks in 1912. Coke, in 1887, 9,000,000; in 1912, 126,000,000. Cotton, wool, and silk, from 261,000,000

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]




for Mr. Hinman to lend his aid, if defeated at the Republican primaries, to any candidate who had the support of William Barnes. the understanding of the Progressive leaders, who agreed to advocate Mr. Hinman's nomination in the Progressive primaries, Mr. Hinman stood ready to make the fight for Governorship on this platform.

Fusion for good government did not, however, become an assured fact. The Republican State Convention, held for the purpose of adopting a party platform, intervened. At this Convention, while no successful attempt was made to place the party leaders on record as in favor of the nomination of any particular candidate at the primaries, it was very clearly demonstrated that the Convention was under the direct control of the reactionary element. Committee meetings were held behind closed doors. No effective effort was made to overthrow or even to qualify the control of the party in New York State by Mr. Barnes. With this obvious fact before him, Mr. Hinman, while professing allegiance to the anti-boss issue, declared in a signed statement that "even if not nominated in the Republican primaries, I shall not by word or act leave my party either before or after the September primaries nor ask support for any nominee of any other party."

With this statement in view, it became impossible for the Progressives to lend their aid to a candidate who had openly declined to fight against the Republican nominated, even should this man be a direct and admitted subordinate of Mr. Barnes himself. Furthermore, the State Primary Law makes it obligatory upon any candidate nominated at the primary to stand for the office for which he has been nominated by popular vote. If the Progressive party had continued to support Mr. Hinman, it might have found itself going before the people with a candidate who declined not only to make a canvass on his own behalf but who stood openly in support of a candidate and of that element in the Republican party fundamentally at variance with Progressive principles.

At the time of writing it seems probable that the Progressive party will put in the field a straight Progressive ticket. The candidates for Governorship on this ticket now most prominently before the party are Mr. Chauncey J. Hamlin, of Buffalo, Mr. William H. Hotchkiss, and ex-State Senator Frederick

M. Davenport. The only hope of a State fusion which remains lies in the chance that the Mitchel and Wilson Democrats will revolt against their own party machine, and that a Democrat of known ability and independence in State politics will be brought forward acceptable to the Progressives. The time for such an eventuality is, however, brief, and the possibility of its achievement



Recently the Palmer-Owen Child Labor Bill, which seeks to stamp out some of the worst forms of child labor by preventing the shipment in inter-State commerce of products manufactured in whole or in part by the labor of children, was reported from the House Committee on Labor with amendments added by the Committee. The Outlook believes that the measure is an excellent one and should be passed.

Briefly, the bill forbids the shipment in inter-State commerce of the products of any mine or quarry which have been produced in whole or in part by the labor of children under the age of sixteen, or the output of any mill, cannery, factory, or manufacturing establishment produced wholly or in part by children under fourteen, or by children between the ages of fourteen and sixteen working more than eight hours a day or six days a week, or after seven o'clock in the evening or before seven o'clock in the morning.

This bill is not so "drastic "" as some of its opponents would have us believe. The first of the above provisions is already in force in fifteen States; the second in forty States, the District of Columbia, and Porto Rico; the third-the eight-hour-day clause, considered the most radical part of the billis already on the statute-books of eighteen States and the District of Columbia; while night work for children under sixteen is forbidden in thirty-three States, the District of Columbia, and Porto Rico.

Such a law as this is needed because, as the National Child Labor Committee says: "After ten years' experience we have reached the conclusion that it is almost impossible to secure uniform and effective laws in the different States. This difficulty arises from the fact that every proposal to enact an effective State law is opposed by the industries that would be affected on the ground that such a law would handicap them in competition

with other States." In other words, State boundaries are impediments in dealing with child labor, as in dealing with divorce, prostitution, the liquor traffic, and the drug evil.

The most serious opposition to the bill comes from those who profess to consider it unconstitutional as violating the rights of individual States. The answer to these objectors is that the measure does not undertake to dictate under what conditions children shall be employed in any State, but does undertake to protect sister States, i. e., the National domain, against the folly of any of its parts. In this respect the backers of the bill only ask Congress to extend to child labor the principle it has already applied to the liquor trade and to the white slave traffic.


1. You have got to make the country as attractive socially as the city if you want to keep the young folks on the farms.

2. There's a good deal of work in the country, but most of our boys and girls have forgotten how to play.

3. Baseball is a splendid game, but it isn't the only one. Every healthy boy should be interested in at least half a dozen others. Don't merely watch others play games; play them yourself!

4. You can't drink strong drink and be an athlete. Get your boys interested in honest and healthy sports, and save them from drink and dissipation.

5. Contests and competitions are not the main thing. "The strong compete and grow stronger; the weak look on and grow weaker." The main thing is play. Learn the great lesson that play is just as necessary for your sons as work.

6. The community should help to run its own recreations. Its festivals should be not only for the people, but of and by the people..

This is the creed for which the name of the little town of Amenia, New York, has come to stand. The wide publicity that has already been given to this brief statement of a rural ideal is directly attributable to the fact that Amenia has attempted to practice what it preaches. As The Outlook recorded a year ago, there is held each August in this Dutchess County village a festival which was originally defined as an "experiment in cooperative recreation." The spirit of this festival is as far removed from the old-time county fair as it is possible to imagine. It is a people's festival, where the people themselves are the chief attraction. A very large




proportion of the farmers and their friends who attend this gathering go, not to look on, but to take active part in the sports of this community "play bee."

For the past five years this Amenia festival has been held in a level meadow on the farm of Professor Joel E. Spingarn. It has attracted visitors each year numbered not by hundreds but by thousands. Amateur baseball, foot races, trap-shooting, pageants, speeches by leaders in State and National life, agricultural demonstrations and exhibits, a horse show at which the steady and practical farm horses of the neighboring region contend for ribbons quite as blue and as red as those won by their aristocratic cousins in Madison Square, all these have at various times appeared upon the programme. Fakers, gamblers, card-sharps, and liquor-sellers, who in the past have not infrequently infested large country gatherings, have been, and for all time will be, barred from this Amenia gathering. May the Amenia idea spread!

There is a place in the life of every township for such a festival. Successfully carried out, it means a long step towards the ultimate triumph, not of the "back to the land" movement perhaps, but, what is vastly more important, the "stay on the land" movement-that movement which looks toward the retention in the country of those who can find their best opportunity for service and for individual development among the difficulties, the trials, and the vital triumphs of country life.


The use of scopolamine in connection with morphine as an anæsthetic in childbirth is not new; it has been known for about twelve years. Recent publication of magazine articles about the "twilight sleep," and especially as it has been practiced at Freiburg, Germany, by Dr. Kroenig and Dr. Karl Gauss, has aroused extraordinary interest in the subject. It is claimed that scopolamine is superior to chloroform or ether, which have long been employed in difficult cases, in that scopolamine induces an unconsciousness like that of sleep and the patient "awakes" without consciousness of pain-although some physicians say that what happens is that the drug renders the mind unconscious so that no recollection of the pain actually felt exists. investigator says that the "twilight sleep" is really a subconscious condition in which the patient considers herself absolutely sound


asleep and unconscious, when she is in reality in a hypnotic condition, entirely susceptible to suggestions from the doctor."

Is the new method safe? On this point there is a difference of opinion among medical authorities. We notice a tendency among advocates of the system to argue (as was done in the Friedmann matter) that doctors are temperamentally opposed to medical discoveries a totally false generalization, as all will say who remember how the discoveries of Koch and Pasteur and others have been applied. It is right that new medical methods should be thoroughly tested before they are heralded as near-miracles; and testing is a matter of special skill and often requires a long time. It is well to be on guard against too ready acceptance of such discoveries lest incalculable harm be done and hopes cruelly disappointed.

[ocr errors]

The "Ladies' Home Journal" is to be praised, therefore, for accompanying an exceedingly interesting article on the treatment at Freiburg, which includes interviews with American mothers who have undergone the twilight sleep," by expressions of opinion from five eminent physicians. Their joint verdict is not favorable. Dr. Vaughan, President of the American Medical Association, says: Up to the present time the profession is not convinced that this drug, either alone or combined with morphine, is free from danger either to mother or child, or both." Dr. Green, Professor of Obstetrics at Harvard, says he has tried and abandoned. the method as uncertain, sometimes dangerous, and inferior to other measures for the relief of pain. Dr. Williams, of Johns Hopkins, has tried the method without satisfactory results, but proposes to give it further trial. Dr. Hirst, of the University of Pennsylvania, believes that as first used it was dangerous, that as now used it is partly psychological. Dr. De Lee, of the Northwestern University, studied the method at Freiburg and formed decidedly unfavorable impressions, adding that he found that the famous maternities of Berlin, Vienna, Munich, and Heidelberg had tried and discarded the plan. On the other hand, newspapers state that the Jewish Maternity Hospital of New York has tried scopolamine in one hundred and twentyfive cases with great success and proposes to extend the treatment.

In view of all these facts, it seems only right to caution the general public against reaching final conclusions hastily, and espe

« PredošláPokračovať »