LORD BRYCE ON THE ARMENIAN ATROCITIES THE WEEK The testimony of German as well as of American missionaries confirms the reports of the all but incredible cruelty of the Turkish Government to the Armenians. One letter from Aleppo signed by four German missionaries was published last year in the Swiss papers, and in part at least in German papers, but finally was suppressed by the German censors. It is a detailed story of unspeakable horror addressed to the German Foreign Office, and urging that "our school work will be deprived for the future of its moral basis, and will lose all authority in the eyes of the natives, if it is really beyond the power of the German Government to mitigate the brutality of the treatment which the exiled women and children of the massacred Armenians are receiving." This letter and other evidence from German sources, together with letters from Danish Red Cross nurses, from other foreigners in the East, and from Armenians, are included in the complete report and summary of evidence prepared for publication by Viscount Bryce, formerly Ambassador to the United States, whose report on the Belgian atrocities convinced many before skeptical on the subject. The New York " Times," which prints this report in advance of its book publication, declares that it forms "a record of horror, callous cruelty, and fiendish massacre far more revolting than Lord Bryce's report on German atrocities in Belgium, which shocked the world a short time ago." In a cable despatch to Dr. James L. Barton Lord Bryce himself says: "Several hundred thousand exiles who survived the horrors of deportation are now perishing of exposure and starvation in the Arabian desert. Latest reports of neutral eye-witnesses describe terrible conditions. Sick people are throwing themselves into graves, begging grave-diggers to bury them; women are going mad and eating grass and carrion; parents are putting children out of their misery, and awaiting death." The evidence amply bears out these statements. Extermination by wholesale, starvation, deportation, torture, ravishment, murder direct and murder indirect, make the other Armenian atrocities of history, foul and terrible as they were, sink into insig nificance. And the Government of Germany dare not even protest when its own missionaries appeal to it out of the East lest it hurt 347 the sensibilities of its ally and close friend! Heartless and callous are mild words to apply to the German official attitude. That the atrocities are continuing is due to just this German indifference, which thus becomes blood-guiltiness. Contributions to the relief of the survivors of this attempt to destroy a race, root and branch, should be sent to the office of the American Committee for Armenian and Syrian Relief, at 70 Fifth Avenue, New York. President Wilson has appointed October 21 and 22 as special days of giving. Let Americans rescue those whom Turks have persecuted and Germans have passed by with indifference. THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: As the Presidential campaign draws to a close political speeches of importance have increased in number. Some weeks ago it was announced that the President would conduct his campaign speaking mainly at his summer residence at Shadow Lawn, on the New Jersey coast. It was then stated that on each Saturday he would make an address before an appointed gathering. He has followed out this plan. On Saturday, October 7, he spoke to the National Woodrow Wilson College Men's League. Among those who made the excursion to hear this speech were Professor Irving Fisher, of Yale, who introduced the President; W. H. Edwards, formerly the Street Cleaning Commissioner of New York; and Hugh Gordon Miller, a former Progressive, who denounced "the men that had scuttled the Progressive ship.' Acting on the principle that the best defensive is an aggressive, President Wilson in his Saturday speech attacked the Republican party on the ground that it consists of discordant elements. He contrasted the Democratic party," which is united, made up of congenial elements, and which has determined its direction by its performances and not by its promises," with the Republican party, which he declared to consist of "men of every sort and variety of purpose, . . . shot through with every form of bitterness, every ugly form of hate, every debased purpose of revenge, and every covert desire to recover secret power." He declared that the special interests were working through the Republican party because they "want control of the Treasury of the United States," and "deter mination of the foreign connections and policies of the United States," and "possession of the legislation of the United States in order that the comfortable partnerships four years ago broken up may be restored." And the President laid before the independent voter the choice between "the liberal and peaceful policies of the present Administration" and "the probably hostile, the probably warlike, and the inevitably reactionary policies of the opposition." On the preceding Thursday he made a speech at Omaha, Nebraska. Here he was greeted by thousands who packed the sidewalks as his car went through the streets. In this speech he declared that there was "as much fight in America as in any nation in the world," but that America "held off from the conflagration in Europe" because "when we use the force of this Nation we want to know what we are using it for." REPUBLICAN ARGUMENTS He re On the same day that the President was speaking in Omaha, Elihu Root, former Secretary of State, made an address to a meeting at Carnegie Hall, New York City. He warned the country that the danger to this Nation was not now, but after the war. He said that peace was not maintained by the surrender of just rights, but by the assertion of those rights accompanied by a knowledge of power behind that assertion, viewed the Administration's dealings with the questions raised by the war, attacking in particular the lack of action behind the aggressive words of the President. He reviewed the President's Mexican policy, quoting the President's statement in Indianapolis that at criticism of it "Woodrow sat back in his chair and chuckled, knowing that he laughs best who laughs last." And he drew the contrast between the appalling conditions in Mexico, which the President's own Secretary of State had exposed, and "the untimely merriment of the Indianapolis speech." He attributed the failures of the Administration to a lack of the spirit of American Nationality in the President and in the Democratic party. If this National spirit- the terrible power of a great Nation in earnest"-is wanting, then "neither fine words nor skillful argument nor expansive sentiment can take its place." The inheritor of this National spirit he declared to be the Republican candidate, Mr. Hughes. On the very day that the news was pub lished of the attack of German submarines upon merchant vessels off the American coast Mr. Hughes made a speech in Philadelphia. In that speech he reiterated what he had said with regard to the Eight-Hour Law, but, without referring specifically to these submarine attacks, roused his audience by referring to the occasion when the Lusitania was sunk and the lives of American men, American women, and American children were ruthlessly destroyed" as one of the factors in the Administration's " humiliating failure to safeguard American rights." He added that, though he did not put life and property on the same footing, "we do not propose to tolerate any improper interference with American property, with American mails, or with legitimate commercial inter In commenting upon the submarine activity off Nantucket Mr. Roosevelt issued a statement, published on Wednesday morning of last week, in which he pointed out that this was the natural consequence of the attitude of the Administration, which, by keeping silent when Belgium was violated, first declined to put America in the position of doing her duty to others, and then, after the Lusitania outrage, allowed America to be put into the position "of refusing to do her duty to her own citizens." It is natural, therefore, Mr. Roosevelt argued, that we should find the war carried "to our very shores." Our failure to protest against the invasion of Belgium was the beginning, according to Mr. Roosevelt, of a policy or lack of policy that has brought danger to us. "Our shameful abandonment of the duty that we owe our own people in the case of the Lusitania," declared Mr. Roosevelt, "was really a giant stride in the policy of impotent submission to the brute policy of the strong." WARDEN OSBORNE RESIGNS The long controversy between Mr. Thomas Mott Osborne, Warden of Sing Sing Prison, and his numerous assailants and detractors has come to a sudden and unexpected end. Just when it appeared to the public that he was about to enjoy the unhampered opportu nity of carrying out his ideas of prison reform, Mr. Osborne resigned last week the wardenship of Sing Sing. His reasons for resigning he gives in an open letter to the You have forbidden that the public shall have full knowledge of what is going on in their own penal institutions, yet this very secrecy which you would enforce is the very thing that made possible the graft and brutality of the old system... Without the head of the institution being consulted, my office is disorganized. The Governor who appointed you is antagonistic to the system that is being carried on at Auburn and Sing Sing Prisons; he has tried to use you and your office for political purposes.. ... I have been finally and reluctantly forced to a realization that without his acquiescence the shameful attacks made upon me in Westchester County would never have been initiated or gained headway. Governor Whitman, upon being informed over the telephone of Mr. Osborne's resignation, made the following statement: I am much surprised. I supposed that he was devoted to his work and anxious to remain in it. Warden Osborne has had the support of the administration from the first. We believe that Mr. Osborne weakens his case by the vague charge against Governor Whitman that he has been insincere in his support of Mr. Osborne and that "without his acquiescence the shameful attacks made upon me in Westchester County would never have been initiated or gained headway." Such a charge as this ought not to be made against the Governor of a State, especially at a time when he is coming before the people for re-election, without specifications and evidence in support of them, and Mr. Osborne furnishes neither. Yet the fundamental issue between the old and the new penology which Mr. Osborne has so dramatically raised, first by his experience within prison walls and then by his administration of Sing Sing, will not be forgotten by the public. Mr. Osborne has made many serious sacrifices for the cause of prison reform. We hope that leaders in prison reform will bring such pressure upon the authorities as will insure a continuance of an honest and humane prison discipline, administered not for the satisfaction of vindictive justice, but for the cure of crime; and that in Mr. Osborne's successor will be found a man who is willing to carry on the fight against the prison bureaucracy and the forces of reaction to a finish. NEW YORK DAIRY FARMERS AND MR. DILLON 349 In last week's issue of The Outlook we reported the serious strike of the farmers of New York State against the retail milk distributing companies of New York City. Since the publication of that account of the strike it appears that the farmers have gained considerable ground. Not only have most of the smaller concerns given in to their demands, but it appears that the efforts of the farmers in keeping milk away from the larger distributing agencies have been continuously successful. Any one who has been at all familiar with the milk situation in New York State knows that the producers have in the past failed to secure a price for their milk which would adequately recompense them for their labor and for the efforts made necessary by the increasingly stringent provision of the health laws of New York City. The farmers have been practically asked by the city to increase the cost of their milk, while at the same time that agency, which wisely compelled them to improve their business methods, had little or no power to help them to secure an adequate return for the labor to be performed. As readers of The Outlook know, the farmers, represented by the Dairymen's League, have been carrying on their fight through the agency of a bureau of one of the departments of the New York State Government itself. A portrait of the head of this bureau, Mr. J. J. Dillon, appears elsewhere in this issue. Mr. Dillon, previous to his acceptance of this office at the hands of Governor Glynn, was engaged for many years as publisher of the "Rural New-Yorker." function and the purposes of his bureau Mr. Dillon summarized at the time of his appointment as follows: The The Bureau of the Department of Food and Markets is to find a profitable market for the products of the farm in the State of New York, and at the same time to devise such an economic system of distribution of farm food products that, through the savings thus brought about, the farmer may receive more and the consumer may pay less. He has worked out his original purpose with an aggressiveness which has won him both friends and enemies. He played a large part in the work of compelling the licensing of commission merchants, in the establishment of a system of open auctions for farm products and a system of publish ing authoritative statements as to the true prices paid for farm products in the markets of New York State. THE HISTORY OF THE In considering Mr. Dillon's work and the strike of the Dairymen's League, it may be interesting to give here a brief résumé of what the farmers have attempted in this latter direction. It was on August 28 that the directors of the Dairymen's League voted to make the New York State Department of Food and Markets exclusive agents for the sale of milk for the members of the League. At this time it was agreed that a minimum uniform price for milk approved by the Board of Directors of the League should be adopted to cover a period of six months beginning with October 1, 1916. At this time the Dairymen's League consisted of some thirteen thousand farmers, controlling nearly one hundred and ninety thousand cows. The price. set by the directors of the League was such as to afford the farmer, when the interest on his investment had been paid, less than a hired man's wages, as figured by various competent and disinterested authorities. On September 6 the plans of the Dairymen's League were approved by a large gathering of farmers at Utica, New York. At this meeting the farmers pledged themselves to "loyally support the plan of the Dairymen's League and the Department of Food and Markets" and to "refuse to sign contracts for the delivery of milk after September 30 or to deliver any milk after that date unless sold through their representatives." A week later the Dairymen's League had grown to some fifteen thousand members, controlling two hundred and fifteen thousand cows, and the membership was daily increasing. The attempt of the large milk producers to force a compromise proved a failure. The farmers neither abandoned their League nor did they succumb to the compromise in price and terms offered by some of the larger concerns. By the latter part of September contracts for milk began to be made at the League prices. The first to succumb to the League demands were the small dealers and the minor distributers. Evidence shows that business men and local bankers throughout the State were enlisted on the side of the farmers. Against those farmers who failed to join the League pressure was brought in the shape of a boycott. As the "Rural New-Yorker" described it, "the hesitating producer who likes to pussy-foot with the big dealers is told by the blacksmiths that his horses cannot be shod in their shops. If he is so intent on independence, he has a chance to carry his independence to the limit. He must shoe his own horses. In many ways this independent producer is learning that the industry has a claim on him. In some places it looks as if he would not be able to buy a hat in his own town-certainly not on credit." . As we go to press the amount of milk reaching New York through channels approved by the League is steadily increasing. The small dealers in the city who have already signed League contracts are in some measure beginning to cut into the trade of the large firms which are unable to secure their full supply of milk. One of the most promising developments is an agreement signed by the officials of the Dairymen's League and certain of the distributers to appoint an investigating committee to determine the cost of producing milk. This committee is to investigate. the cost of producing milk during the difficult months of January, February, and March. If they report that the League's demands are too high, prices will be modified for that period to the dealers who have signed contracts. Mr. Dillon describes as the ideal condition both for dealer and farmer a system under which the farmer would produce milk at cost, plus a reasonable profit, and the distributer would sell milk at cost, plus a reasonable profit. Such a system would permit the consumer to profit by the extra supply of cheap summer milk. A NOTABLE ANGLICAN PRELATE On another page appears the portrait of the present Bishop of Worcester, England, Dr. Yeatman-Biggs. When Englishmen hear his name mentioned, they are likely to think, first of all, of his athletic record. He played on the Winchester football team when he was at that famous school; he shot two years in the Wimbledon eleven; and was President of Athletics for his college (Emmanuel) at Cambridge, of which he is now Fellow. He was trained for holy orders by the well-known Master of the Temple, Dr. |