WHAT IS WHISKY P

Perhaps no more complicated and difficult problem has arisen under the Pure Food Law than that involved in the question asked in the title of this paragraph. It is not by any means merely a chemical problem or one of the right use of a word. Commercial interests of vast magnitude have been at stake. On their side, the "straight whisky" manufacturers insist that there is a recognized method of distilling, aging, and handling whisky which results in a product to which alone the name whisky applies, and that any product which is made out of so-called neutral spirits or any product which is a blend of the real whisky and neutral spirits is a totally different thing, and should not be called by the same name. The Pure Food authorities have taken the same view, while an opinion and report rendered some time ago by Solicitor-General Bowers supports the opposite view. There is no question at issue here as to whether all whisky is poisonous or deleterious in the sense used in the Pure Food Law. That law has two chief objectsto forbid the sale, in articles of food and drink, of that which is poisonous or directly injurious to health; and, second, to prevent deceit in palming off on buyers articles of food or drink which are not what they pretend to be. President Taft, in his final decision, rendered last week, takes the ground that the definition of the word whisky is of minor importance if some course can be adopted to prevent fraud in the sale of the different kinds of whisky. He accepts the general use of the word in vogue, he says, for a hundred years, to include all potable liquor distilled from grain, although he thinks that Mr. Bowers carries this doctrine in some

points a little too far. But the President declares that the real object to be accomplished is to let the public know exactly what kind of whisky they buy and drink. This he accomplishes by directing that everything sold under the name of whisky shall be so labeled as to indicate its character—that is, "straight whisky" shall be so labeled, and other products shall be branded" whisky made from rectified spirits," or "whisky made from redistilled spirits," or "whisky made from neutral spirits," as the case may be, while, if the product is aged in the wood, that fact may also be stated. In this way Mr. Taft holds that no man's lawful business will be injured and that no misunderstanding can exist. This method of cutting the Gordian knot has in it elements of common sense and fairness, although it will not satisfy either party to the commercial controversy nor please the advanced Pure Food advocates. The latter urge that if blended whisky and spirits may be sold under the name whisky, blended sugar syrup and glucose may be sold under the name syrup, and possibly blended butter and oleomargarine under the name butter. To this it may be answered that each case must be considered on its own merits, that the President is not here dealing with universal principles but deciding a particular problem, and that it is misleading and futile to give such a decision too wide an application.

Whether this is done by a law conferring citizenship on the whole body of Porto Ricans, or by an act enabling them, by the performance individually of some simple preliminary acts, to become American citizens, he thinks is of secondary importance. It is certainly true that the present condition of the Porto Ricans is anomalous. They are men without a country. They are not citizens of the United States, and they are not citizens of Porto Rico, since that dependency is not recognized by the nations as having any independent national existence. But the question whether citizenship should be conferred on them as a body by a general act, or should be offered to them individually to be accepted by a process analogous to naturalization, is one of fundamental importance. The Constitution of the United States provides that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." This clause does not now apply to Porto Rico, because Porto Rico is not part of the United States. It is territory belonging to the United States, but is not a part of it, and its inhabitants can neither claim the advantages nor are they subject to the restrictions of the Federal Constitution. If Porto Rico were a part of the United States, all money collected in the island from duties, imposts, and excises would, of necessity, be paid into the Federal Treasury to be expended for the general welfare. As Porto Rico is not a part of the United States, but the property of the United States, this clause of the Constitution does not apply to it, and all the money collected in the island by Federal taxation is paid back to the Insular Government to be expended in the island. This constitutes considerably more than half of its income. The receipts from local taxation are, with the exception of ten per cent to defray the cost of collection, paid over to the municipalities to be locally expended. The road-building and other public improvements; the school system, which now provides education for every district in the island; and the sanitary system, under which two hundred and fifty thousand of the inhabitants have been successfully treated for tropical anæmia, are all largely dependent on the moneys received from Federal taxation. To deprive the island of this in

come would mean incalculable disaster to the islanders. If Congress were to pass a general law making Porto Ricans citizens of the United States, there is good reason to believe that the courts would hold that this did, ipso facto, make Porto Rico part of the United States, and it would thus deprive the islands of their chief income. This, at least, is the opinion of some able Constitutional lawyers. On the other hand, the mere fact that a large number of American citizens live in Porto Rico would no more make Porto Rico a part of the United States than the fact that a large number of Japanese live in the Hawaiian Islands makes the Hawaiian Islands a part of Japan. For these reasons, in our judgment, the question whether Congress passes a general law declaring all Porto Ricans to be American citizens, or a special law enabling such Porto Ricans as desire to do so to become American citizens by a process analogous to naturalization, is not a question of detail. The right decision of this question is fundamental to the well-being of Porto Rico. It is also important to America, because American citizenship ought not to be conferred wholesale upon a people without regard to their qualification for citizenship. It should be conferred only on those for whose competence for American citizenship and for whose loyalty to the American Nation there is some responsible guaranty. The same principles apply and the same course should be pursued toward the Philippines, and, unless past legislation prevents, toward the Hawaiian Islands, for the latter would be far more benefited by being put in receipt of all Federal taxes levied in the islands, to be therein expended, than they can be by the theory that they constitute an organized Territory of the United States and are under its Constitution.

York Harbor. That at League Island in the Delaware River, opposite Philadelphia, however, should really be the most important of all, because it is near a great mining and manufacturing region. Its chief function consists in the overhauling of vessels, and this requires time. The yard at Norfolk must also always be important. But the one at Charleston, questionable anyway, was absurdly built so far up the river that it is practically useless. Of course, in early days, when ships were of light draft and when coast defenses amounted to little, it was the practice, based on a good principle, to establish navy-yards at a considerable distance from the sea, so that they could not be readily attacked and captured. That accounts for the location of the present navy-yards at Charleston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. But the channels to all of these yards have none too much water. Hence, if there is any danger at all, it is that an enemy might sink a collier or other vessel and effectually bottle up any of our battle-ships which happened to be there. Another feature generally overlooked in regard to navy-yards so situated is that their usefulness will be greatest after a battle has been fought and vessels have been injured. Then ships must be taken to the nearest yards and repaired as quickly as possible so as to get them ready for action again. Owing to damage to her hull, an injured battle-ship will probably draw several feet more water than when in normal condition. It will not, then, be possible to get such ships to navyyards where the channel is long and tortuous and where the depth of water is only just enough for the battle-ship in her usual draft. But, in any event, on the Atlantic coast, the navy-yards at Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Norfolk are all that are really required. As to the Gulf coast, the navy-yard at Pensacola may be a necessity, but one at New Orleans certainly is superfluous.

for the present must be content with what we have. Our navy-yard at Mare Island lies thirty miles from San Francisco, and ships must pass through a channel always difficult to keep at the requisite depth. If we could acquire, at a reasonable cost, property and dry-dock rights in San Francisco itself, a navyyard would be ideally located and close to sources of supply and labor. Farther up the coast, a navy-yard in Puget Sound is necessary. Two sites were considered. One was at Lake Washington, just outside the city of Seattle. The site was desirable, not only because it is close, as every navy-yard should be, to a large supply of labor and ample transportation facilities, but also because the lake affords a supply of fresh water. Wherever possible, fresh water should be had in order to lay up ships more advantageously than in salt water. One of the reasons why League Island Navy-Yard is so valuable is because of its fresh water supply. To reach Lake Washington from Puget Sound a short canal would have to be cut. Because of the fear that in time of war an enemy might block the necessary canal, the Government decided on a site now called Bremerton, fifteen miles across Puget Sound, in a wilderness where a forest primeval had to be hewn down in order to establish a navy-yard well located as to natural advantages but far away from any labor supply and far away from any railway—indeed with no means of communication with the outside world except by vessel across the Sound. Our navy-yards might absorb less from the people's funds than at present if a rearrangement were made. We have too many navy-yards on the American mainland.

Kansas City has already been described in The Outlook. The street railway company has a franchise which does not expire until 1925. In order to refinance the company, it obtained from a complaisant Council and Mayor an extension to 1951. The concession offered was the promise of the sale of six tickets for twenty-five cents on the cars and twenty-five for a dollar at drug-stores, after three years. Meanwhile the company was to build a viaduct to carry a roadway and car tracks from the heights of Kansas City into the river bottoms of the wholesale and packing-house district. The wording of the reduced fare clause of the ordinance was ambiguous, there was no limitation on the issue of securities, and the forfeiture clause was SO worded that it would have been virtually impossible to forfeit the franchise. Fortunately, under its new charter there is a compulsory referendum in Kansas City on all franchises for a term of more than thirty years, and a referendum on all franchises on a petition of twenty per cent of the voters. The City Club at once protested against the terms of the franchise, and organized a nonpartisan Committee of One Hundred to manage the campaign. This organization had the powerful support of the Kansas City "Star." Meetings were held in various parts of the city under its direction every night for the fortnight before election, and several hundred volunteers were obtained to work at the polls on election day. In the last days of the canvass the street railway company became desperate, and pay stations were publicly operated where literally hundreds of men were employed as "workers" to talk for the franchise on the street cars and to get out the vote on election day. So demoralizing were the methods employed that the Committee of One Hundred was impelled to publish an emphatic protest against the attempt "to buy the election." The chief elements of danger in the situation lay in the possibility of corruption and fraud because of the great money stake of the street railway in the outcome, and in the fact that nearly thirty per cent of the voters were disfranchised through lack of the opportunity to register. The board of election commissioners, which had been appointed by

Governor Folk, and the police commissioners, appointed by Governor Hadleyboth of whom, by the way, had come out publicly against the franchise—took extraordinary precautions to make the election honest. The majority against the franchise registered in no uncertain way the opinion of the people of Kansas City.

THE DOWNFALL OF A TYRANT

66

The flight of Zelaya was the sensational event of the week in Nicaragua. He took refuge in Mexico, and it is unlikely that he will ever return to afflict the country he has misgoverned and robbed. The extent of the plunder he has gained is indicated by a despatch stating that the average yearly profit of the tobacco and alcohol monopolies has been over a hundred and fifty per cent; no one doubts that Zelaya got an enormous rake-off;" the Government will now take over these monopolies and use the profit to pay off foreign bonds. Mexico is well within international practice in allowing Zelaya refuge on her soil, and the visit of a special Mexican envoy to Washington has brought out a reassertion of the mutual intention of Mexico and the United States to require in Central America peace and good government, and the submission of the disputes between the republics to the Court of Arbitration established under the treaty made in Washington in 1907. Rumors that Mexico has resented the recent action of our Government as to Nicaragua lack confirmation. The internal condition of Nicaragua will require time for a satisfactory settlement. It is true that, as reported last week, the insurgents under General Estrada have practically annihilated or dispersed the army sent against them by Zelaya, and it is to be noted with great satisfaction that after the bloody battle of Rama the sailors and medical corps of our war-ships rendered invaluable aid and performed a much-needed office of humanity in nursing, sheltering, and feeding the wounded. It is true, also, that efforts are being made to bring about an agreement between President Madriz and General Estrada. Yet the prospect is not very encouraging; first, because General Estrada is not likely to lay down his arms and submit the

question of the Presidency to a general election to be conducted by the Government at Managua, which is under the control of Madriz-and this is what Madriz proposes; and secondly, because, although Estrada is victorious in the east, the conquest of the west is a very serious and difficult undertaking. We note a well-informed letter in the New York "Sun" from Mr. John T. McCall, an American who has lived several years in Nicaragua, in which it is stated that "the scenes of Estrada's campaign are from one hundred and fifty to two hundred miles from Managua, the capital, and to reach the seat of government General Estrada will have to march his army through a section of almost impassable country, where the soil the soil is sandy, which impedes progress, and where the underbrush is not unlike that of a jungle. It is probably the most impassable section of country in Nicaragua." The same letter declares that Madriz is a gentleman of high integrity, a lawyer by profession, and capable of restoring peace and establishing a stable government, while Estrada is of mixed blood, reckless, and "an undesirable citizen." The United States is not likely to interfere in the internal affairs of Nicaragua so long as there exists in each part of the country a de facto government which maintains the rights of American residents, but it will not allow endless anarchy and strife.

THE NEW KING OF

THE BELGIANS

An interesting personality has just come to the front of the stage in Europe-Albert, King of the Belgians. Like the others of his race, he is a tall, well-set-up man, with dignified mien and carriage, and with particularly engaging manners. Albert's education was for a long time directed towards his betterment as a man rather than as the inheritor of a kingdom, for after the death of Leopold II's only son Leopold, Prince Baldwin, eldest son of Leopold's brother Philip, Count of Flanders, became the heir. The untimely death of the accomplished Prince Baldwin a few days before the date set for his marriage to Princess Clementine, the late King's only unmarried daughter, made Albert the heir. The new King was

born in 1875. Young as he is, he has been accustomed to the tragic afflictions which sometimes overwhelm royal houses. In addition to Prince Baldwin's mysterious death, there was the tragedy of their aunt Carlotta, Leopold II's sister, who went to Mexico an Empress and soon after her return became the maniac she has been ever since. The new King's cousin Stephanie, Leopold II's second daughter, must always be associated in the King's thought with the ghastly suicide of her husband, the Crown Prince Rudolph of Austria; and his cousin Louise, Leopold's eldest daughter, was long imprisoned in a madhouse. The sorrows of the royal household might have assured to the late King the especial sympathy of his subjects, but he barred himself from such devotion by his selfishness. It remains for Albert to win sympathy by unselfishness. As yet he does not impress one with the kingly dignity characteristic of Leopold II's personal manner when that monarch was on "dress parade." But history offers few more unlovely spectacles than that of the latter-day record of the late King, in the rakishness and escapades which made his name loathsome. His cherished nephew who has now ascended the throne must have taken some account of all this. It would be difficult to do otherwise, for Leopold II made little effort at concealment. Domestically, Albert I should be a contrast to Leopold, especially as the new Queen, Elizabeth of Bavaria, is a charming and popular woman. The King, well known as a brilliant student of economics, will doubtless distinguish himself as his uncle did by siding with the progressives and not with the reactionaries in all that concerns Belgium's welfare at home. Abroad-and this means the Congo— Albert's recent visit to that country must have shown to him the actuality of certain conditions there. He is reputed to be a humane man. He could not have seen the Congo country and people without being impressed by the necessity to emphasize humanity in the treatment of the natives. Even assuming that the stories which have come to us are somewhat exaggerated, enough is true to make the new King walk with extreme circumspection. We may hope and expect that his reign will represent the personal dig