THE PROTESTS OF NEUTRAL NATIONS

The other neutral nations continue their policy of protest against the outrageous violation of their rights by Germany, but there has been no break of diplomatic relations. Oddly enough, the most definite threat of such a break has come in a report from China, which states that the Chinese Government has advised the German Government that China will break off

diplomatic relations if the new submarine measures are pursued. The text of Brazil's warning to Berlin has been made public, and is both emphatic and clear in its refusal to recognize the blockade and in charging Germany with responsibility for any acts inimical to Brazilian interests. Spain declares her duty" to protect the lives and properties of our citizens against all illegal attacks" through a declaration to this effect by the Premier, and as we write there are reports from London that Spain's intervention in the war is considered not improbable.

Holland is perhaps injured more than any other neutral nation by the narrow limits permitted by the German proclamation to commerce. It is barred from passage on the route to India, which is of the very highest importance to Dutch colonial shipping. The situation of Holland is an extremely difficult and delicate one, because German forces in great number are on the Dutch frontier, and many fear that a serious dispute between Germany and Holland would lead to a crushing blow on Holland such as fell upon Serbia and Rumania. Because of her geographical position, Holland would be a very valuable aid to the Allies if she should join their forces. Great Britain, for instance, could then send troops down the Rhine and the Meuse through Dutch territory and in other ways would have a desirable opportunity for a flank attack on Germany. If, therefore, war should break out between Holland and Germany, it would seem probable that Great Britain would lose no time in rushing to the support of Holland. From a military point of view, the question whether such support could strengthen Holland's resistance in time to save the country is a most important and interesting one.

RELIEF FOR BELGIANS WILL CONTINUE

The Belgian relief work has been partly crippled but not by any means destroyed by the action of Germany in refusing to allow the work of the Commission for Relief to continue under American management in Belgium. A few Americans may remain, notably Mr. Brand Whitlock, the American Minister to Belgium, who has, however, no diplomatic standing with the German Government in control of Belgium; but with these exceptions the American workers will be withdrawn. The actual administration of the relief will be continued under the direction of Dutch and perhaps Spanish committees; and it is believed that some agreement will also be reached with Germany by which relief ships bearing provisions will be afforded a safe voyage to Holland.

Meanwhile Mr. Hoover, the Chairman of the American Commission for Relief in Belgium, who is in this country, has earnestly pointed out that the work of collecting money for foodstuffs should be and will be pressed as never before; that the need for relief continues; that the money contributed will work of the Commission in the last two years and more in keep be beyond doubt used for the purpose intended. The splendid ing starvation away from Belgian men, women, and children must not be in vain. The Commission by work in this country will see to it that the effort continues and increases in value and effectiveness.

DANGEROUS PEACEMAKERS

We received on February 13 the following telegram from a reader in Birmingham, Alabama:

Can you secure information respecting personnel of "The Clearing-House for Peace," 70 Fifth Avenue, New York, which sends me the following: "Beg you to secure at once large number of telegrams to all Alabama Representatives in Washington urging Congress to avert war by forbidding Americans to enter

war zone, and by passing a resolution providing for people's referendum on war or peace.'

In reply we have given our correspondent the following information, which may be of interest to other readers: so-called peace organizations: the Emergency Office, the EmerThe Clearing-House for Peace is a federation of the following gency Peace Federation, the Church Peace Union, the American Union Against Militarism, the Woman's Peace Party, and the American Neutral Conference Committee.

Among the well-known people who are actively affiliated with gational clergyman who has for many years been prominent in this Clearing-House are the Rev. Frederick Lynch, a Congrepeace and arbitration movements; Mrs. Henry Villard, daughter Flagg Young, formerly Superintendent of Schools in Chicago; of William Lloyd Garrison, the great abolitionist; Mrs. Ella peace ship which made such a lamentable failure a year ago in Louis Lochner, Henry Ford's personal representative on the its attempt to get the soldiers out of the trenches before Christmas; and Max Eastman, editor of the "Masses," a very radical weekly of New York which combines in an extraordinary and somewhat inconsistent fashion both Anarchistic and Socialistic tendencies.

Largely through the organized work of the Clearing-House for Peace, advertisements have been published, since this country broke off diplomatic relations with Germany, in various cities of the country, calling upon the American people to adopt and support its programme. That programme is as follows:

1. To urge our Government to defer settlement of any international conflicts affecting America until the present war is

over.

2. To keep Americans out of the danger zone.

3. To consult the people by referendum before declaring war. debatable, but it involves a complete surrender of one of the The first of these proposals may perhaps be regarded as primary functions of government, the function of protecting the life and property of its citizens.

The second proposal comes dangerously near being treasonable. If we were formally at war, it would be treason. It directly supports the demand of Germany made upon the United States that it should keep its ships out of the danger zone on the high seas at the risk of their being torpedoed without warninga demand that the President of the United States has denounced as so intolerable and so contrary to American rights and human justice that because of it he has dismissed the German Ambassador and recalled the American Ambassador from Berlin.

The third proposal is stupidly futile, if not unconstitutional. Congress alone, under our Constitution, has the right and duty of declaring war. If it should refer the question with power to the people of the United States, it would be abdicating one of its most responsible and important functions. The officers of the Clearing-House for Peace assert that such a referendum's constitutionality could be preserved by making it purely advisory, and that Congress could get the sentiment of the American people through the postmasters in twenty-five days. In a crisis like the present, if it were not for the British navy, the German navy could undoubtedly in less than twenty-five days seriously threaten and perhaps bombard and partially destroy New York or Boston or Charleston or Savannah. If France had waited twenty-five days to find out through her postmasters plans for defending the United States against foreign invasion whether she should defend herself against an invasion of the German army, Paris would be a captive city to-day. Of all the that we have yet heard, this proposal of doing it through the postmasters is the most ludicrous.

The American pacifists who are advocating these measures deny that they are working for the interests of Germany; but the fact is undeniable that the peace which their measures would be very likely to bestow upon this country would be a German peace.

INSURRECTION IN CUBA

Something very much like an incipient revolution has been going on in Cuba. The trouble grew out of the Presidential election of last November. President Menocal was a candidate

for re-election on the Conservative ticket, and Dr. Alfredo Zayas was the Liberal candidate. The Liberals easily carried the election in Havana and in many other places, and supposed that they had won the victory, but in some places the result was in doubt and was disputed. In accordance with the constitutional provision, the question went before a Central Election Board, and after its decision, which was in favor of the Liberals, was taken before th Supreme Court of Cuba. The Court ordered new elections in Santa Clara province, and these elections are taking place as we write, February 14.

The Liberals charge illegal and violent acts on the part of the Menocal Government. President Menocal vigorously denies these charges and claims to have acted in every respect in accordance with the law. He has called for volunteers to put down the rebellion.

Acts of violence occurred in several parts of the island, and particularly in Santiago, where military forces of the Government took possession of the city after rioting. Several radicals accused of plotting against the President's life have been executed, it is reported, and outbreaks have occurred in several places. Our State Department issued what is really a note of warning to the Cuban people, reminding it that under the Platt Amendment the United States has the right of intervention if peace and order are not kept. The note has not been well received in Cuba, but, whether necessary or not, it certainly states what is the right of this country, and what may become its duty. There have been rumors that the trouble in Cuba has been fostered by German activity, but there is no positive evidence of this.

THE ELECTION: THE FINAL ACT

On Wednesday of last week, in the hall of the House of Representatives, Congress met in joint session to canvass the vote of the Presidential election.

On November 1916-the first Tuesday after the first Monday-American citizens cast their ballots for a certain number of electors ho were to choose two persons to fill the highest offices of the land.

On the second Monday of January last these electors met at their respective Capitols in forty-eight States and voted for the candidates of the party they represented. Three copies were made of the number of the ballots cast, accompanied by a certified list of the electors. One of the copies was intrusted to a person who was required to deliver it to the President of the United States Senate before the Wednesday next ensuing, a second copy was forwarded to the President of the Senate by post, while the third copy was deposited with the Judge of the United States District Court of the district in which the State Electoral College meets.

On the second Wednesday in February, as prescribed by law, the two houses of Congress met to witness the count of the ballots cast in the several Electoral Colleges. The Senators marched to the House, preceded by pages bearing the boxes containing the election certificates from the forty-eight States. In the Vice-President's absence, the President pro tempore of the Senate, Senator Saulsbury, presided. The two members of each house appointed as tellers were, for the Senate, Senators Kern, of Indiana, and Clapp, of Minnesota; and for the House, Representatives Mapes, of Michigan, and Rucker, of Missouri. The ballots were opened in alphabetical order of the States, counted, and the total result announced. This result showed that Woodrow Wilson and Thomas Riley Marshall were elected President and Vice-President of the United States for the fouryear term beginning March 4, 1917. Thus end the proceedings of another election under our cumbersome political machinery.

CONGRESS AND DEFENSE

The prevailing opinion that Congress is not alive to the necessity of passing proper measures for National defense may possibly be slightly modified by two events which have just taken place.

The first is the passage last week by the House of Representatives of the largest Naval Bill in the Government's

history. It was approved by the emphatic vote of 353 to 23. It appropriates over $368,500,000, about $55,000,000 more than last session's bill. The present measure, we are glad to say, includes provisions empowering the President to commandeer ship-yards and munition factories in time of war or of National emergency, and appropriates $1,000,000 to acquire aircraft patents, but, we are sorry, to learn, does not include the Administration's request for the appropriation of $150,000,000 to hasten war-ship building. The Senate, we hope and expect, will add the amendment.

An event of even greater importance, in the ultimate analy sis, was the report to the Senate, at last, from committee, of the Universal Training Bill, introduced in December, 1915, by Senator Chamberlain, of Oregon. This measure, as reported, provides that every male person who is an American citizen or who has declared his intention to become such shall undergo military or naval training for a period of six months during the calendar year in which he reaches the age of nineteen years. Persons physically unfit or persons on whose earnings a father, mother, brother, sister, wife, or child is wholly dependent for support are exempt; and members of any religious sect whose creed forbids bearing arms in war shall not be required to undergo training in the use of arms, but instead shall be trained in the non-combatant branches of the military or naval service. Every person liable to training shall, until the end of the calendar year in which he reaches the age of twenty-eight years, be a member of the reserve citizen army or of the reserve citizen navy, organizations which, in the event of a defensive war, or of its imminent danger, may be called by the President into active service. It is expressly provided, however, that these organizations shall not be used in cases of strikes or other industrial disputes. As officers of the reserve army and navy the President may commission officers or enlisted men of the regular army or navy, who of course do not vacate their regular army or navy commissions and are not prejudiced in their relative or lineal standing by reason of their service in the reserve forces. The President may also commission as officers of these forces persons who volunteer for such service and who have passed examinations as provided respectively by the Secretaries of War and of the Navy. It is interesting to note that there shall be admitted to such examinations (1) the officers of the organized militia or naval reserve of any State or Territory; (2) members of the Officers' Reserve Corps of the United States Army; (3) men who have attended at least one army training camp or naval training cruise; (4) men who have had at least two years' military training in schools or colleges approved respectively by the Secretary of War or of the Navy; and (5) other persons whose training has been approved by them.

A measure of this character is of elemental and vital importance. Some such bill (we do not refer to the details of it, but to the principles which it embodies) should be passed promptly, not only because of the present crisis, and not only because at any time it would put our country in a position of self-respect regarding National defense, but also because of its disciplinary effect on the character of the American youth.

CONGRESS: TWO RESOLUTIONS

Last week two resolutions were introduced into the United States Senate in sharp contrast to each other.

The first came from Senator La Follette, of Wisconsin. According to his resolution, it would be unlawful when this Nation is not at war for any merchant vessel of the United States to be armed and to depart from a port of the United States or any of its Territories or possessions for a port of any other country, its colonies or possessions. Of course such a resolution would deny to our merchant vessels the protection to which they are entitled.

The second resolution was introduced by Senator Saulsbury, of Delaware. According to it, whenever a state of war exists between two or more nations with which the United States is at peace, and one or more belligerents upon the high seas enter on a course of warfare not justified by the laws of war as generally accepted or as construed by our Government, our ports may be resorted to by the war-ships of any belligerent for the purpose of destroying or escaping from any vessel of belligerents

engaged in using such illegal methods. This resolution would nullify the recognized rule of international law which limits belligerent vessels to twenty-four hours in a neutral port. It is opposed by those who believe that, as a step towards war, it is unwise. It is favored by those who believe that it would enable our Government, even without a declaration of war, materially to assist in checking illegal methods of sea warfare.

WHAT IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH?

Count Ilya Tolstoy, the son of a famous father, is in this country lecturing. Columbia University has refused to give him the use of one of the college buildings in which to deliver his lecture to the students, and the International Club of Students has passed resolutions declaring this refusal to be" an intolerable curtailment of that liberty of thought and freedom of action which is said to characterize America, and which is and should be the spirit of all enlightened institutions of learning." We should hardly think the action of the University or these resolutions of the students called for comment were they not accompanied by an editorial in the New York "Tribune," the spirit of which is indicated by its title, "Columbia Censor." This editorial is not worthy of a paper generally characterized by the discriminating intelligence of the "Tribune." The notion that the right of free speech entitles every man to take possession of any hall or church and speak upon its platform or in its pulpit is a preposterous notion. The right of a free press does not entitle any man who has anything he wants to say to demand the use of the "Tribune's" columns in which to say it. The fact that the "Tribune" probably rejects a score of offered contributions to every one it publishes does not indicate that the "Tribune believes in a censorship of the press. An uncensored stage does not mean that any band of itinerant players has a right to demand the use of any unoccupied theater in which to give its piay, and the fact that there is no such right of itinerant players recognized in America does not indicate that we believe in a censorship of the drama. The right of free speech does not mean that any man has a right to demand the free use of any hall in which to give his doctrines to the public.

Count Tolstoy has no more right to demand from Columbia University the use of one of its halls for his lecture than he has the right to demand of the trustees the use of Carnegie Hall. The buildings of Columbia University have been erected for educational purposes and given to the Board of Trustees to be used in such ways as they deem best for the education of the six thousand and odd students under their care. It is not only their right, it is their duty, to discriminate between different applicants for the use of these buildings. It is as much their duty to edit the use of their public halls as it is the duty of the "Tribune" to edit its columns. If the trustees or those to whom they have delegated power in this matter are of the opinion that the address of Count Ilya Tolstoy will not be of educational value to the students, it is not only their right, it is their duty, to refuse him the use of the hall. If he wishes to lecture to the students, he is at perfect liberty to hire any hall in the neighborhood which is for rent, and to give his address to as many of the students as care to hear it. We express no opinion on the question whether Count Tolstoy's lecture would be of educational value to the students of Columbia University. We have no opinion on that subject. We simply affirm the right of the owners of buildings to determine to what use those buildings shall be put, and to allow them to be used only in such a way as in their judgment will promote the educational purpose for which they were constructed.

The right of free speech does not mean the right of every man to speak on every topic in every place and at every time regardless of the rights of the owners of the property.

COUNT ILYA TOLSTOY AND HIS FATHER

Sons of famous fathers are disappointing, partly because too much is expected of them, and partly because some of them overestimate the extent to which their inherited luster can be used as capital. Count Ilya Tolstoy, son of Count Leo Tolstoy, the great Russian writer and philosopher, is, however,

somewhat of an exception to this rule. This is perhaps due to the fact that he looks so much like his celebrated parent that his audiences, to whom he lectures on "The Life and Ideals of My Father," are inclined to be satisfied with looking at him and not ask for more.

Not that Count Tolstoy as a lecturer is principally commendable as a statue, to coin a Hibernicism. Not at all. For one who has hardly practiced English in twenty-five years he speaks with remarkable clearness and fluency. Still, much of the interest with which audiences will hear him lies in the fact that he has the straight classic line from brow to tip of nose, the deep-set eyes smoldering with a seriousness that seems partly pity, partly mysticism, the wide, lofty, thoughtful brow, and that rough-hewn look of the whole head characteristically Slavic in its suggestion of strength which marked the appearance of the remarkable writer whom Turgenev called the "Elephant of Russian Literature."

One of Count Tolstoy's purposes in lecturing in America is to create interest in the establishment of a home for aged writers in Yasnaya Polyana, near the birthplace of Leo Tolstoy.

The Count's lecture is mainly interesting for the light it throws on the intimate side of the life of the lecturer's dis tinguished father. The boy who was deficient in his studies and who was " especially weak in the Russian language," and who became a youth who "sought the sensations of the moment in battle or carousing," developed into the self-mastered, self-made man who" found himself "at about the time of his marriage at the age of thirty-five. He worked every day till five o'clock in the afternoon and was infinitely painstaking in polishing his stories. One of these, "The Captive in the Caucasus," was altered no less than one hundred and one times. He lived and talked over his creations with his family before writing them, and Countess Tolstoy, the author's wife, although the mother of thirteen chil dren, of whom eight grew to maturity, found enough time to do all her husband's copying for him.

Although Count Ilya Tolstoy declares that "at this epoch, when the hurricane of madness is sweeping the earth, it is indeed proper to consider the gigantic work of my father in giving to humanity the gospel of love and non-resistance," the fact that he himself has sent two sons to Russia's firing-line indicates that he does not go quite to the impractical extremes his father preached in observing the doctrine of non-resistance. Neither do the Russian people, in whose devout reliance in their Orthodox faith Leo Tolstoy found the inspiration which saved him from self-destruction in the days of his great spiritual crisis. But although few Americans will accept this cardinal point in the tenets of Leo Tolstoy the philosopher, there are thousands of them who love Leo Tolstoy the man and author and who will welcome this intimate account of him from his son.

MUSIC BY REFLECTION

A work of art is like a quarrel-it takes two to make it. Even if the artist never shows his creation to another, there still remain two persons necessary. One is the creator, the other the recipient or appreciator, and almost always the true artist has to be these two by turns. Art flourishes only where there are not only artists but appreciators of art. This is one of the reasons for the abundance of beautiful architecture in Belgium and France, literature in the history of England, and music in Germany. If America is to become a musical country, there must he developed a large body of intelligent, critical, and apprecia tive listeners.

To find out what progress music is making in this country it is therefore worth while to study concert audiences. An audience at a recent concert of the Philharmonic Orchestra in New York City proved to be well worthy of notice. On this afternoon Carnegie Hall was crowded, as it often has been in recent months at Philharmonic concerts. No seats were for sale on the day of the concert. That fact seemed promising. But the real measure of that audience was not its size but its attitude toward the music that was played. First came Beethoven's "Coriolanus Overture," played to the rustling accompaniment of latecomers looking for programmes. Then came Brahms's "Fourth Symphony."

This is perhaps the most obscure of Brahms's four sympho

nies. It is at the other extreme from his joyous" Second." It is written in the key of E minor, which, as Dr. Hugo Riemann, the famous teacher of music, has said in commenting on this great work, "is the tonality of the fall of the year." As Mr. Stransky played it on his great instrument, the Philharmonic Orchestra, the listener who really listened could not escape the autumnal mood that ran from beginning to end. The instrumentation which Brahms used would fit in well with that combination of bareness and richness that is characteristic of late autumn-the leafless trees and the golden browns and yellows of the meadows. In one respect the orchestra played perfunctorily. One had a feeling that conductor and men alike were hastening to be through with it; but in another respect they played it well, for they gave it its true tonal color. The audience was tolerant.

L

Then came Strauss's huge orchestral and rather Teutonic joke "Till Eulenspiegel and His Merry Pranks." The faces of the audience were like those of a crowd at a vaudeville show. They rather liked the quips and quirks of the instru

ments.

Then, at the end, came what the crowd was waiting forJosef Hofmann. He played Rubinstein's "Concerto in D Minor." He played it for all that it was worth. There was not a bit of pomposity to which he did not lend a little grandeur, not a brilliant scale which he did not make luminous, not a commonplace phrase that he did not adorn by his touch. And the audience was immensely pleased.

JACQUES COPEAU AND THE
REPERTORY THEATER

Jacques Copeau is in America. This will be welcome news to the leaders of the repertory theater movement, which has been marked by the opening of small repertory theaters all over the country within the past two or three years. As an English the Manchester "Courier," says: "What Granville Barker is to London, that Jacques Copeau is to Paris. He is the spice of the Parisian theater."

newspaper,

M. Copeau has come to this country with the intention of visiting the chief cities of the United States and Canada to lecture about the French repertory movement, of which he is the most qualified representative. His trip is to prepare the way for a tour which he hopes to make with the company of the Théâtre du Vieux Colombier, of Paris, as soon as the war is ended. M. Copeau's name is inevitably associated with the name of that theater, which he founded.

The founding of the Théâtre du Vieux Colombier by M. Copeau, with the assistance of a few other young Frenchmen, was a revolt against the commercialism and the stilted rigidity of the contemporary French theater. M. Copeau's theater, in his own words, is distinguished by the following characteristics:

First, "the simplification, and in many cases the suppression, of the scenery in order to center the public's attention on the dramatic action itself."

Second, "the suppression of so-called 'stars' to the advantage of the general rendering of the play by one homogeneous company, perfectly drilled and trained under the direction of a single leader."

Third, “the creation of the school of the Vieux Colombier, in view of shaping young actors from their childhood who will form a family, or brotherhood, of modest, convinced, earnest, and disinterested artists."

The company in which M. Copeau is at once director, actor, and playwright has produced the plays of the great writers of all countries-Molière, Musset, Dostoievski, Shakespeare, Ibsen, as well as the works of modern authors of less renown. How well M. Copeau has succeeded is attested by the indorsements he has received from the leading critics, playwrights, actors, and philosophers of Europe, from men and women such as Eleanora Duse, Henri Bergson, Auguste Rodin, Vincent d'Indy, the late Emile Verhaeren, and many others.

M. Copeau believes that the actor must fit the play, not that plays must be written to suit the whim of actors. He also believes that no play is too good for the public-witness the low scale of prices at the Théâtre du Vieux Colombier. America can learn much from Jacques Copeau.

SOME REMARKABLE KENTUCKY AMERICANS

Students of racial characteristics are just beginning to find out that one of the most interesting groups of native Americans is found in the Kentucky mountains of the Appalachian Range. If there are any real Anglo-Saxon Americans in the United States, they are to be found in this homogeneous community which, for lack of easy transportation, has been cut off from the rest of the country for many years. Here, unmixed with any other racial strains, are descendants of ante-Revolution pioneers from Scotland, Ireland, and England. The father of Chief Justice Marshall was one of the pioneers from Virginia who went into this region, and it was this stock, probably, which gave us Abraham Lincoln.

Miss de Long, the author of a sympathetic sketch of Kentucky mountain life which appears on another page, and her colleague, Miss Katherine Pettit, are the directors of the Pine Mountain Settlement School at Pine Mountain, Harlan County, Kentucky, which is doing both a patriotic and a delightful work in that region. Most of our readers know about Berea College, but some perhaps do not realize how much primary education in this mountain region is needed to even prepare the way for a larger institution. "People sometimes think,' says Miss de Long, "that the mountains are already oversupplied with schools. They do not realize that the thirteen thousand square miles of mountain land in Kentucky would more than cover the whole of Massachusetts and Connecticut, and that to object to a school at Pine Mountain because there is already an excellent one in the next county is like denying a school to Philadelphia because there are educational opportunities in New York. Shut off behind Pine Mountain, these children have no chance unless a school comes to their midst."

These mountain men, women, and children are full of courtesy, friendliness, and poetry. Some of the old English ballads have come down orally from generation to generation and are sung familiarly almost as they were at the time of Shakespeare.

Miss de Long informs us that some of the children of the school were lately discussing what is "the purtiest thing in the world."

66

"Why, blossoms," said one; "they hain't nary thing purtier 'n blossoms, nohow."

Said another: "The ground, an' hit all a-kivered with snow, an' the little snow-birdies a-hoppin' around on hit."

Said a third: "The purtiest thing in the world is when you hain't got enough Christmas purties to finish the wreath you're a-makin', and you have to go out to git you some more, and the moonball, hit's a-glistenin' and a-gleamin' on Isaac's Run."

The fourth, a lonesome little boy who had been at the school just a week, remarked, "The leetle ol' pup at home, hit's the purtiest.' Here are germs of a fine and delicate sentiment such as is not often found in more sophisticated communities. Ought not these children to be helped and taught and made friends of as the Pine Mountain School is doing?

AIRPLANES ON EXHIBITION

To those who remember the early days of aviation and the flying-machines that were exhibited less than a decade ago, the airplanes that were shown in the Pan-American Aeronautic Exposition in the Grand Central Palace, New York City, last week, seemed very highly developed. The contrast was as great as between the horseless carriage of the late nineties and the modern touring limousine.

As the visitor entered the exhibition, the first thing he saw was the airplane used by the Wright brothers in their first flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, thirteen years ago last December. It was a big, frail thing of long splinters and canvas. At the other end of the hall was a tight little inclosed car with wings, and with upholstered seats for driver and two passengers, looking as safe for the amateur as an automobile. There could be no more striking difference in outward appearance than between these two machines, both of them called airplanes.

Many of the visitors at this Exposition were, of course, technically interested in the art and industry of flying, but some of the visitors were not sufficiently spoiled by knowledge to lose their sense of wonder. The polished and varnished bodies, the