I thought that when Age came I'd stand But now, when you with easy grace SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD BY THE MARQUIS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR There is a section of literature for which we know no adequate name, that is not exactly biography, nor history, nor reminiscence, but a combination of all three, infused with the informality that characterizes talk across the mahogany. Our readers will find this article by Lord Aberdeen a most engaging example of this kind of writing. It throws light upon some historical events which cannot be had from formal historical narrative. American readers need scarcely to be introduced to the author of this article, who is known to them not only because he was once Governor-General of Canada, and therefore was a neighbor of ours, but also because of his own and Lady Aberdeen's activities on behalf of humane enterprises. Haddo House in Aberdeenshire, the residence of the Marquis and Marchioness of Aberdeen and Temair, has for many years been the home of liberal thought and the center of philanthropic movements. Indeed, the name of Aberdeen has long been associated with liberalism in England. Lord Aberdeen's grandfather, the fourth Earl of Aberdeen, was a Liberal Prime Minister of England. Reminiscences of the fourth Earl will be included in another article by the Marquis of Aberdeen, which will appear in a later issue of The Outlook.-THE EDITORS. I' T happens from time to time that some well-known figure in public life acquires and retains a sobriquet, usually of a familiar, homely character. This distinction-for as such it may truly be regardedis comparatively rare. Thus the names of occupants of the lofty position of President of the United States of America have become known and respected, not only throughout their own vast country, but in the world at large. Yet since the days when the illustrious Lincoln was affectionately spoken of as "Old Abe," only one of his successors (so far as I am aware) has been the recipient of so intimate a surname as "Teddy." So, too, on the other side of the Atlantic; to only a few of the British Prime Ministers of modern times has this kind of designation been applied. Lord Palmerston, no doubt, in his later years was often spoken of as "Pam;" and more particularly in the pages of Punch," which has always largely voiced the sentiment of "the man in the street" (of London), and especially of Pall Mall (clubland), he was sometimes alluded to as "dear Old Pam." Disraeli was constantly designated, by friend and foe alike, as" Dizzy," and in Gladstone's later years "the G. O. M" (i. e., the Grand Old Man) became an habitual expression. And in no instance has this kind of style been more completely adopted than in the case of "C-B," when there was the additional advantage of the abbreviation of the somewhat cumbrous name Campbell-Bannerman. So too in the military area. During the past one hundred years of English history many a general has earned and received fame; but since the time when the Duke of Wellington was always spoken of as "the Duke "-or, as in those days it was more frequently pronounced, "the Dook "-none, so far as I have heard, received throughout the British army what might be called a "pet name until that of "Bobs was conferred on the late Lord Roberts. The significance of this sort of appellation as a tribute consists, of course, in the fact that it is absolutely spontaneous and, so to speak, undesigned. Almost every other kind of public compliment might conceivably be (and doubtless often is) effected, at least in part, through the exercise of some kind of influence, direct or indirect. Not so with this. And, moreover, the sort of sobriquet referred to is almost invariably the outcome, not merely of respect or admiration, but also, on the part of a large portion of the public, of a feeling of liking and attach ment. These prefatory reflections have been prompted by the recollection that the subject of the following brief sketch may certainly be placed in the category of those who have been distinguished in the manner suggested. For throughout the broad Dominion of Canada Sir John Macdonald was habitually spoken of as "John A.," and this by people of all parties. Of course his numerous friends and supporters used the term with an intonation of confidence and admiration. As to opponents, the designation of "Old To-Morrow" was sometimes applied; but this epithet would obviously emanate from critics, who are encountered by every person who takes an active part in affairs.1 I made acquaintance with Sir John Macdonald at Ottawa, in the year 1890. I was there as a passing visitor, with no idea, at least in my own mind, that I would some years later be called upon to occupy the position of Governor-General of Canada; but I had the honor of being entertained at a luncheon given either by the Cabinet as a whole or by one or two of its members who invited their colleagues. At any rate, I was seated next to Sir John, who was then Prime Minister of Canada, which exalted position he occupied during nineteen years of his arduously active life. At the time of which I am speaking he had reached the age of seventy-five, but he might certainly have been taken for a younger man. And his vivacity was still in full force; also the sense of fun which was one of his marked characteristics, for I remember that before we had been at the table two minutes he began to banter one of his colleagues regarding an imaginary episode which had appeared in the newspapers. In a touching Introduction to the biography of Sir John, his widow, the Baroness Macdonald, speaks of him as a man naturally reticent; and his able biographer, Mr. Joseph Pope, also speaks of him as essentially reserved. From this it must be deduced that he possessed the art or Canada's Old To-Morrow' lives to-day remarked that there was considerable resemblance between him and Sir John Macdonald. My own impression, however, is that this was more imaginary than real, and was suggested largely because of a likeness in methods of policy, etc. At any rate, the resemblance was only superficial, for Lord Beaconsfield habitually wore an air of solemnity, even of mystery, whereas Sir John, although he could assume a Sphinx-like expression, would in the main give an observer the impression that the whimsical aspect of things could be evoked at any moment. This readiness for pleasantry is of course a great advantage to a leader of men. There is an absurd little tale, probably mythical, but yet typical, regarding the late Mr. Edward Blake, who was for many years the able and highly esteemed leader of the Liberal Parliamentary party in Canada. The story' runs that one of his friends remarked to him that it would be a good thing if he could manifest a little more easy-going geniality with his friends and political supporters. Mr. Blake inquired as to exactly what was meant. "Well," said Mr. Blake, "I shall try to improve." And, sure enough, when soon afterwards he was leaving the building, an - acquaintance met him and remarked, "I am afraid we are to have snow;" to which Mr. Blake replied, "It is of no consequence"! The two greatest achievements with which Sir John Macdonald was associated were the confederation of the provinces of Canada and the Canadian Pacific Railway. It is not claimed for Sir John that he was in a literal sense the "Father of Confederation." This title, if allotted to any one individual, might probably be bestowed on the late Sir Alexander Galt, but undoubtedly Sir John Macdonald took the lead in the elaborate and difficult negotiations and adjustments which were necessary in carrying out a scheme of great complexity; and that he was enabled to do so was largely due to the fact that he was profoundly influenced by an absolutely sincere and strong conviction as to the far-reaching benefits to be deriyed for Canada and for the British Empire as a whole by the attainment of this object. Unquestionably the purpose and predictions of Sir John Macdonald and the able Canadian statesmen who were associated with him have been fully justified by results. As to the Canadian Pacific Railway, this far-reaching and vast enterprise had been promulgated before it was actually taken up by the Canadian Government; but of this great achievement also it may justly be said that Sir John Macdonald was a chief factor in its inception, and in this case also the favorable predictions, not only as to the value of the work from a British Imperial point of view, but also as to its commercial soundness, have been amply verified. No sketch, however brief, of Sir John Macdonald would be complete without allusion to an episode which occurred toward the end of his life, and which evoked an utterance which became historic. In estimating this it is necessary to bear in mind some of the preceding events. Toward the latter part of the nineteenth century a movement was promoted in Canada toward closer commercial relations with the United States. This policy was advocated chiefly by the Liberal party of that time, and it became the subject of an acute controversy, chiefly on the point as to whether unrestricted reciprocity or "commercial union " would ultimately result in organic union-or, as this came to be designated, the "annexation " of Canada to the United States. The advocacy of extended reciprocity with the United States gained more prominence than might otherwise have been the case through the support which it received from Professor Goldwin Smith, who, having made a reputation at the University of Oxford, settled at Toronto. Mr. Smith went very far in his support of unrestricted reciprocity, though it is probable that he would not have admitted that he had in view the complete absorption of Canada in the United States. However, the idea was increasingly fostered that the supporters of reciprocity were tending toward disloyalty to the British connection, and this view was strengthened by the surreptitious acquisition and publication of a memorandum composed by a Toronto gentleman of some literary attainment and a strong Liberal, in which he advocated views of a very advanced character. It thus happened that the Liberal party as a whole were represented as indorsing these views. Shortly afterward, namely, at the beginning of the year 1891, a general election took place in Canada. Sir John Macdonald issued a long and vigorous election address containing a sentence which was probably one of the most telling and skillful utterances ever used in any political election. The words were as follows: 66 As for myself, my course is clear: a British subject I was born-a British subject I will die." The effect was electrical, and it instantly traversed the Dominion of Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast with inflammable force; and not only in Canada, for I well remember the stirring effect which it produced in Great Britain. Of course the impression was immediately created or confirmed that the Liberal party in Canada had become gravely compromised in regard to loyalty to the British sovereignty and the British connection, but there can be little doubt that this idea was unfounded and imaginary. Most of the leaders of the Liberal party disclaimed any such imputation; and that this disclaimer was just was well illustrated by the fact that when Sir Wilfrid Laurier became Premier of Canada, in the year 1896, one of his first acts was to propose and carry through an arrangement for preferential treatment by Canada in favor of goods imported from Great Britain. (A similar plan had previously been devised by Sir John Macdonald.) But happily there is no need to revive the controversy as to the consequences or effect of reciprocity proposals, for two facts stand out clearly: First, the attitude of Canada as a whole is entirely in favor of the existing connection with the motherland-this being, of course, the result of the judicious extension by Great Britain of autonomy to Canada in the past. Secondly, there is the auspicious fact that the relations between Canada and the United States have steadily become more and more favorable and friendly; and, quite apart from any commercial arrangements, there has truly been a practical spontaneous reciprocity, on the one hand, in the influx of a very large number of Canadians into the United States, where it may be hoped that they have uniformly proved to be a desirable addition to the community; and, on the other hand, there has been a very considerable migration of United States citizens, especially from among the farmers of the Northwestern States, into the neighboring country, where certainly they have shown that they can become excellent Canadians. The death of Sir John Macdonald evoked many eloquent and striking tributes, not only from his friends, but on the part of many to whom he had been strongly opposed in politics; and I conclude these jottings by two quotations, the first being the concluding portion of a truly noble speech by Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the leader of the Liberal party in Canada, and the other from a discourse by Lord Rosebery: 66 To-day we deplore the loss of him who, we all unite in saying, was the foremost Canadian of his time, and who filled the largest place in Canadian history. Before the grave of him who, above all, was the Father of Confederation, let not grief be barren grief; but let grief be complete with the resolution, the determination, that the work in which Liberals and Conservatives, in which Brown and Macdonald united, shall not perish, but that, though united Canada may be deprived of the services of her greatest men, still Canada shall and will live." The speech of Lord Rosebery was delivered on the occasion of the dedication of a bust of Sir John Macdonald in the crypt of St. Paul's Cathedral-a speech which was surely a gem of oratory for such an occasion: "This standard, so richly studded, imposes on us, the survivors, a solemn obligation. It would be nothing were it the mere symbol of violence and rapine, or even of conquest. It is what it is because it represents everywhere peace and civilization and commerce, the negation of narrowness, and the gospel of humanity. Let us then to-day, by the shrine of this signal statesman, once more remember our responsibility and renew the resolution that, come what may, we will not flinch or fail under it." WEEKLY OUTLINE STUDY OF CURRENT HISTORY BY J. MADISON GATHANY, A.M. HOPE STREET HIGH SCHOOL, PROVIDENCE, R. I. Based on The Outlook of March 7, 1917 Each week an Outline Study of Current History based on the preceding number of The Outlook will be printed for the benefit of current events classes, debating clubs, teachers of history and of English, and the like, and for use in the home and by such individual readers as may desire suggestions in the serious study of current history.-THE EDITORS. I-INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS A. Topic: 1. The Submarine Warfare. 2. War with Germany. Reference: Page 397; Editorial, pages 402, 403. Questions: 1. Give the facts about the destruction of the Laconia. Is its destruction serious enough to be considered an "overt act"? 2. The Outlook says it was a "murderous act." Is it sensible and reasonable ever to consider a nation a murderer? If so, how can such a murder case be tried? Who is to sit as jury? Who judge? What the punishment? 3. Is or is not The Outlook going too far when it says we are already virtually in a state of war with Germany"? 4. What constitutes war? Who, and who only, in the United States has the right to declare war? 5. Discuss the advisability of a National advisory referendum before having war declared on any nation by 66 America. 6. For what reasons is war between Germany and the United States imminent? Are those given by The Outlook satisfactory? Pacifists say that our jingoes and our militarists are responsible for " our state of war with Germany." Discuss both views. 7. If, as The Outlook says, "nothing has been gained in two years" by our dealings with Germany, would it not have been better had the United States declared war on Germany when the Lusitania was sunk? 8. Some say America is fairly well prepared for war. The Outlook says we are "almost wholly unprepared."What and on which side are the facts? 9. What further ought this country to do? B. Topic: The Colombian Treaty. Reference: Editorial, page 404. Questions: 1. Explain why the proposed treaty with Colombia was drawn up. Is it primarily a party matter? What are its terms? 2. What reasons have for considering you or not considering the secession of Panama from Colombia an "ineffaceable blot of honor on the Roosevelt administration? 3. Many millions of American public money are thrown away on "pork" each year; or do you not advocate the spending of fifteen millions on good will? (The securing of Colombia's good will.) 4. Do we owe Colombia nothing? Is she indebted to us? II-NATIONAL AFFAIRS A. Topic: A Budget System. do 1. What is a budget system? How is it determined? Did the United States Government ever use such a system? 2. What effect would a National budget system have upon legislation in Congress? 3. Make out a list of the benefits a budget system would effect. 4. For what reasons does our Congress not have a budget system? 5. Describe the present method of conducting our National finances? 6. Discuss The Outlook's statement, "The only [italics mine] way in which Government finances can be managed in a businesslike way is by the establishment of a budget system.' 1. What is your personal view of the way our National legislative body has conducted business during the past thirty months? 2. Give a résumé of what to you seems to be Mr. Abbott's view. 3. If Congress during the time mentioned has not exhibited thorough Americanism, who is to blame? 4. How many reasons can you give for agreeing or disagreeing with Mr. Abbott as to, leadership in Congress? 5. What are the things you would like to have President Wilson state as America's domestic and foreign policy? Have we a National policy? Discuss. 6. What is your opinion of the theory of government which says that those "in authority must never act until they hear from the country'"? 7. What does Mr. Abbott say about citizens in a democracy letting their opinion be known to those who represent them? Discuss whether or not he is right. C. Topic: The Theater and Education. Reference: Pages 411-413. Questions: 1. What is a municipal theater? Do you think there should be one in every city, say of 100,000 inhabitants or more? Reasons? 2. Outline the management of such a theater. 3. If the theater is " one of the most vitally important means of education," as Mrs. Belmont says, why are so many opposed to theater-going? Do you think it is so educationally important as does Mrs. Belmont? 4. For what reasons is the drama as a profession undergoing critical test? 5. Discuss the function and the influence of moving-picture theaters. Are they too much and too frequently patronized? 6. What is helpful recreation? Discuss the problem of providing it? III-PROPOSITIONS FOR DISCUSSION (These propositions are suggested directly or indirectly by the subject-matter of The Outlook, but not discussed in it.) 1. History shows that the present stage of civilization has been brought about largely by means of war. 2. Amusements contribute more to decay than to education. 3. Every man's judgment is vitiated by hope. 4. No nation to-day possesses pacific intentions. 5. No nation ever enjoys the reputation for fair play. IV-VOCABULARY BUILDING (Define accurately the following words and expressions, all of which are found in The Outlook for March 7, 1917.) Repudiation, condone, palliative, insurance, National budget, ratification, precedents, despots, sinister, transit, debate, oratory, leadership, acrimonious, vacillation, theater, classics, tradition, "highbrow," tolerant, amateur, maudlin, twaddle, mimics, environment, faculty. Glasses like those pictured above make your eyes look old. Besides, what a nuisance it is to peer over the top of your reading glasses or remove them entirelyevery time you look at distant objects. Fussing with two pairs is still more inconvenient. And the old-fashioned bifocals, with the seam or hump, are so unsightly and age-revealing. The one way to retain youthful, efficient eyesight is to wear KRYPTOKS (pronounced Crip-tocks) keep your eyes young in usefulness, because they combine near and far vision in one lens. They keep your eyes young in looks, because no seam nor hump reveals the fact that you are wearing double-vision glasses. The surfaces of KRYPTOKS are clear, smooth and even. Ask your oculist, optometrist or optician about KRYPTOK glasses. Write for booklet: "Eyesight KRYPTOK COMPANY, INC. 1051 Old South Building BOSTON, MASS. With clear smooth even surfaces Someone Says, "Billiards!" And Out Comes the Brunswick Table Folded up in a closet or in any spare space, the "Quick Demountable" Brunswick Home Table is triumphantly brought forth by eager hands and set up in the center of the room. It is only the work of a minute to push back the chairs, rack the balls and fire the shot that starts an evening of royal sport. Carom and Pocket Billiards never tire-their charm is endless. Sparkling hours of merry rivalry with those you love-moments of tense uncertainty! Expert Playing Qualities To live a healthy, worry-proof life, to entertain friends and to keep boys home-install a scientific Brunswick Home Billiard Table. Beautiful oak and mahogany, accurate angles, fast ever-level beds and quick-acting Monarch cushions. Our handsome billiard catalog shows sizes and styles to fit in any home. Write for free copy today. Balls, Cues, Etc., Free Complete High Grade Playing Outfit included with every Brunswick-Balls, Cues, Rack, Markers, Tips, Cue-Clamps, Chalk, Brush, Expert Book of 33 Games, etc. Write for Color-Catalog See these tables in photographs of homes like yours. Get our low prices, easy terms that let you play as you pay and home trial offer. All contained in our interesting billiard book and color-catalog, "Billiards-The Home Magnet." Send coupon or write for free copy today. The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Company Dept. 49G, 623-633 S. Wabash Ave., Chicago THE BRUNSWICK-BALKE-COLLENDER COMPANY Dept. 49G, 623-633 S. Wabash Ave., Chicago Without obligation, I should like to receive your color-catalog, "BILLIARDS-THE HOME MAGNET," and details of your free trial offer. Name..... Address... Ns O two of these buildings are alike.. Some are large, some small; some are fireproof, some are not. Which of them will burn down? Which of them pay high insurance? You cannot tell from the outside. You have to go inside and look up at the ceilings. You have to look for the evidence of automatic-sprinkler protection. Do you think because your business is in a small building it does not need such protection? Don't make that mistake; a fire generally hits small businesses harder than big ones. Do you think because your business is housed in a fireproof building that it is safe from interruption by fire? Don't make that mistake. Scientists find that the contents will usually burn more fiercely because held in suspension by the grill-like nature of steel and concrete buildings. And your insurance rates prove it. Grinnell Automatic Sprinklers in a nonfireproof building will give you a lower rate on the contents than you can get in a fireproof building with the contents not so protected. And the saving in insurance in a few years will go far towards paying the cost of your Grinnell installation. Perhaps you wonder why the Grinnell Sprinkler System makes such a tremendous difference in your insurance rate; perhaps you think it only "sprinkles." If you saw a Grinnell-head in action you would be surprised. The heavy spray, which comes spurting down over an area of one hundred square feet on the fire, is no "sprinkle "-it is a downpour," and half the time it puts out the fire all by itself before human beings can get into the game at all. And it prevents water-damage by putting the water where it is needed, instead of deluging the whole place like the city fire department has to do sometimes. Fires are not what you are afraid of, but the "fires-that-spread." Those get beyond control, demoralize the plant, break a link in the chain of production and perhaps destroy the whole establishment. Well, a sprinkler system keeps the baby-fires from ever being the spreading kind! It takes the fear of fire entirely off your mind. Now, sit back a moment and figure up frankly, and not too optimistically, what you would be up against if you had a fire serious enough to cause suspension of work. Think of this: it is a serious matter today, with the competition in the labor market what it is, to lose a whole productive organization because of a few weeks" shutdown. Think, also, of the customers you would lose; the orders delayed or unfilled; the idle salesmen; the payroll in part, at least, going on; the general havoc and mess! You know insurance doesn't cover that! Then figure what it is worth to be safe against interruption of business, as the owners of Grinnell-protected buildings are! THE READER'S you I was much interested in the incident report in your issue of February 14, where it is stated that the New York Symphony Orchestra began its concert by playing "America." It recalled to my mind what happened in the Metropolitan Opera House on January 22, 1916, when the "Meistersinger" was being sung. At the beginning of the third act the orchestra suddenly started up "Deutschland, Deutschland über Alles, über Alles in der Welt," and the whole audience to its feet and sang sprang the whole song from memory, showing how overwhelmingly German the audience was. Immediately thereafter the orchestra started "The Star-Spangled Banner," and again the audience rose, and, strange to say, many were able to sing this too. You can very easily find out if sprinklers are for you. Write for the Grinnell Information Blank, have your bookkeeper fill it. out, and send it back. With the answers to the question in hand, we can tell you very quickly whether you have a sprinkler proposition or not. Don't theorize! Get the figures. Write -now-to the General Fire Extinguisher Company, 289 West Exchange Street, Providence, R. I. As regards the incident you report, you of course know as well as I that the melody to which we sing "My Country, 'tis of Thee" is an international melody, used in this country, in Great Britain, and Germany. The audience thought "My Country, 'tis of Thee;" the German and Austrian members of the orchestra, in all probability, thought "Heil Dir im Siegerkranz, If Mr. Damrosch had wished to do something really patriotic, and unmistakably so, he should have had the orchestra play "The Star-Spangled Banner." PAUL DE SCHWEINITZ. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. [As a matter of fact, there was not a particle of doubt as to what was meant by the action of the orchestra on the occasion of the Symphony concert. It was unmistakably not "Heil Dir im Siegerkranz," nor "God Save the King," but was "My Country, 'tis of Thee." By the "The way, Star-Spangled Banner" is not an American air. It is the old English song "To Anacreon in Heaven"-the song of a convivial club of amateur and professional musicians of the latter part of the eighteenth century in London. The only popular patriotic song that we have of National origin which body recognizes and applauds and enjoys we have absorbed from those who fought for the Lost Cause. If everybody voted as his heart dictated without regard to logic or tradition, the vote of the people on the question as to what our National air should be would be very nearly unanimous for "Dixie."-THE EDITORS.] every THE FOOD PROBLEM: WASTE IN HOTELS Who has not been impressed with the fact that in the great hotels food ordered to the tables of the wealthy is seldom half consumed, much of it never taken from the "service dish to the plate of the guest? Yet all of this food, once inside the diningroom, is, on removal, treated as so much scrap, loses its value as food, and is sold in bulk for its relatively slight value for byproducts. This statement is not true of the smaller hotels, many of which allow their employees to procure their own meals from what they choose to save. But in the five or six of our largest hotels the patronage is willing to pay for extravagant service and would not tolerate any |