eleven years. I remember one morning I assigned him two solid pages of paradigms-all of the Latin pronouns, personal, relative, interrogative, etc. It was all new ground for him. He reported to me in an hour to recite the lesson. I thought it was impossible for him to have learned so much in such a short time; but, as I recall it, he made only two mistakes in the two pages!

Life had many interests for the boy even at that age. Though he read much, and over a wide range, he was not a 66 bookworm. His body as well as his mind was always active. He loved to walk and to ride horseback. He seemed to learn as much from nature as he did from his books.

Animals, especially domestic animals, had a special attraction for him. There was at the school a herd of cows. Quentin had a name of his own selection for each of them. The barnyard had a peculiar fascination for him, especially the pigs. I don't remember whether he had names for each of these or not; but be used to spend much time watching the inmates of the pen. There was one runted shote the smallest of the litter-to which he took a particular fancy. One day he bargained with the stableman for the purchase of the pig. I think the price agreed upon was seventy-five cents; but those were not war times! Quentin put his prize in a crocus sack, slung it over his shoulder, and started off bareheaded for the Washington trolley, some two miles distant. On the trip to Washington the sack was placed on the seat in front of its owner. No pected its contents until one passenger in the crowded car started to sit down on the bag, when a squeak came forth which was heard the length of the car. Versions of the story varied as to the final disposal of the pig. Quentin told me that he sold it at a profit to some man in Washington. The newspapers got hold of the tale, and declared that the sack was carried up to the White House and its contents deposited on the floor in the midst of the assembled family. At all events, Mr. Roosevelt heard of his son's bargain, because the next day Quentin was asked to bring a nicely dressed shote over from the School for a supper to be given the following day at the White House to the Ben Greet Players.

one sus

One might have thought that a child who had from his birth been more or less in the public eye and who sometimes did things differently from other boys would have cared for the lime-light. But never did any one shun publicity more than Quentin. The newspapers sometimes published little stories about him; but the boy would never talk to a reporter, and did all he could to keep even his name out of the papers. During his nine months at school he never sat for a photograph, unless possibly in a family group. He would always run if he saw any one approaching with a camera. When the Washington papers heard the pig story related above, a number of reporters appeared at the school, several of them armed with cameras. They would have given anything for a picture of Quentin with a pig! They tried to snap one of him unawares, but he dodged each time behind one of the other boys. Finally, in desperation, he called upon the county magistrate, who ordered the reporters from the grounds.

The same spirit which caused his colonel at the aviation field to write of the young lieutenant after his death," His endeavor was the success of the squadron, rather than to get individual airplanes to his personal credit," was noticeable in the boy of eleven. He was ever mindful of others, and seemed to take especial pleasure in doing little acts of kindness. If he thought I wanted anything from the little country store near the school, he would be off to get it before I would express the wish. He was generous almost to a fault. I would hesitate to admire anything he had for fear he might insist on giving it to me. I still have and treasure a number of more or less valuable articles which he presented to me.

Quentin left the school a few weeks before the Commencement in 1909 in order to accompany his mother, his brother Archie, and Miss Ethel (now Mrs. Derby) to Europe. After some weeks in Italy and France, the party returned to America.

During that summer I received several post-cards from Quentin and one nine-page letter. It is a most remarkable production for a boy of eleven. It shows his wide interests and the development of his mind far better than could any words of mine. Written in a firm, neat, regular hand, well expressed, in the.

66

The remainder of the letter gives his experiences and boyish impressions on the trip. Here are some extracts which iliustrate the boy's impressionable nature as well as his intelligent appreciation of what he saw on his travels:

Isn't Notre Dame wonderful? I think anything could be religious in it; and the Louvre, I think it would take at least a

P. S

I have found I cant send the Rictures until the next letter but I well send them then I forget to that him while I was in Jaly

Tell You I used is

go up the hill & have Satin berous from an old Corsican monk who could not speak english

I had to talk to him in french

Trench

He produced an ancient, latin grammar and we learned all the verbs domm deponent vertes His pronunciation than his books and

was no younger

he kronounced I=d like amadus/ for amatus but I really learned. ahat & I wrote all the verbs Lomon by heart in a coby book. The pictures will come in day. Do- long quented River Roosevel

FACSIMILE OF A PAGE OF QUENTIN ROOSEVELT'S EUROPEAN LETTER WRITTEN IN 1909 WHEN HE WAS ELEVEN YEARS OLD

year to see it. I love some of the pictures. I think the little Infanta Marguerita, by Velasquez, is the cunningest thing I ever saw, and I think they are all very beautiful.

I think it is very funny that their [the French] way of celebrating a religious feast is to have some traveling circus come in with merry-go-rounds and pop-guns, and stay till the fête is

over.

There are more shops open on Sunday than Monday here, because Monday is the official play-day, and cannot be lost. And of those Cathedral windows, for which German Kultur has recently shown no respect, this American boy writes:

I think that the stained glass they have here is very beautiful. Just think of having twelfth-century glass in a church window. to-day! They are very pretty. There are some beautiful fifteenthcentury windows at a little place called Montfort Lamourie. Simon de Montfort used to live there, or rather stayed there some time.

Recalling the days we had spent together with his Latin, Quentin says (see the facsimile on the preceding page):

While I was in Italy I used to go up the hill and have Latin lessons from an old Corsican monk who could not speak English-so I had to talk to him in French. He produced an ancient French-Latin grammar, and we learned all the verbs down to deponent verbs. His pronunciation was no younger than his books, and he pronounced "t," "d"-like "amadus for "amatus.' ." But I really learned a lot, and I wrote all the verbs down by heart in a copy book.

When I read last July the news of the young aviator's death, I thought at once of this letter he had written me so long ago from Paris. I had a vague recollection that Quentin had mentioned something about airplanes and a race he had wit nessed "somewhere in France." I took down my album of souvenirs, found the letter, and these were the first words to catch my eye:

We were at Rheims and saw all the aeroplanes flying, and saw Curtis who won the Gordon Bennett cup for swiftest flight.

You don't know how pretty it was to see all the aeroplanes sailing at a time. At one time there were four aeroplanes in the air. It was the prettiest thing I ever saw. The prettiest one of the ones was a monoplane called the Antoinette, which looks like a great big bird in the air. It does not wiggle at all, and goes very fast. It is awfully pretty turning.

This aerial race had been witnessed at Rheims. The fatal combat had occurred just east of Fere-en-Tardenois. The lieutenant, then, had fallen within twenty miles of the city where nine years earlier the eleven-year-old enthusiast had marveled at the four aeroplanes in the air at the same time.

Is it possible that Quentin even then longed to have a machine of his own that would carry him "like a great big bird" through the air? Let the reader judge for himself from these closing words of the letter:

W

THILE in London recently I spent an afternoon with Sir William Goode, Liaison Officer of the Ministry of Food with the United States and Canada. That is to say, he is the living link between Herbert Hoover and Mr. Clynes.

He took me to a private showing of a film representing the children of England writing letters of thanks to Mr. Hoover. At the time of Mr. Hoover's visit to London, when he received the children's thanks in person, he would have been given the Freedom of the City of London but for the fact that there exists no precedent for conferring that freedom unless the recipient has taken the oath of allegiance to the Sovereign. Sir William Goode is of the quiet, forceful, decisive type to which Mr. Hoover himself belongs. He talks without saponaceous exuberance. He is devoid of fuss and feathers and petty official consequence. He has been in America several times, and can talk Chicagoese as well as English. His mind is of the Lewis gun persuasion, his business habit is methodical, and he keeps statistics under his hand as a field marshal reads a map and envisages the detail.

Sir William pointed out that the United Kingdom now calls on America for sixty-five per cent of the farmers' essential food supplies.

The chief items in the list are bacon, ham, cheese, cereals. Beef and pork, condensed milk, and sugar conspicuously figure, the last named, however, coming in large part from Cuba and Java. Canada shares with the United States the duty of supplying barley, maize, oats, wheat. Lard, butter, and oil seeds are very considerable items. Fortunately, the cereal crop of the Brit ish Isles this year is highly successful; the stone-fruit crop has been an utter failure, and as much as $1,500 an acre was paid for the right to harvest the scant production of pears and apples.

Two wheat crops of some three million tons each ordered from Australia fell by the wayside, which, gave America the burden of supplying the deficiency.

Sir William lays stress on two factors which have had much do with America's success in feeding Great Britain.

The first is the individual self-denial of Americans, the results of which are now directly seen every day and everywhere in the British Isles in the ample supply of ham, bacon, and sausage made available.

Another-scarcely secondary-is the downright candor and directness of dealing on the part of Mr. Hoover, who has so ably filled his difficult post that our people have learned to trust him and have complied with his wishes, realizing that he seeks nothing for himself and only desires to do what will win the war.

That Mr. Hoover has made good," declares Sir William,

"and that his countrymen and countrywomen have fulfilled his expectations, we in Great Britain, with rations such as no German civilian has seen for over two years, have every reason to know and to appreciate, thanking God as we eat them that President Wilson found the right man to be Food Controller of the World."

An important point to note with regard to the diet of the working population of Great Britain is the significance of cheese. The average workman probably wants it even more than he wants meat. A gallon of milk is needed to make a pound of cheese. Cheese is manufactured in half the counties of England-Somersetshire, Wiltshire, Cheshire, Leicestershire, Laucashire especially. If the makers find that by an improperly regulated scale of prices they are losing fourpence or fivepence a pound, naturally they are not going to continue. They will deal in milk instead. The price adjustment is a matter which the Ministry is bound to consider carefully in the interest of the laboring population. Most of the cheese now coming from America goes not to the civilians but to the army.

Another matter to which strict and constant attention must be paid is unretarded shipment, lest ham and bacon spoil in transit. If the bacon has to be superimpregnated with salt to save it, it becomes not less repugnant to the British palate than it would be to our own. And even boiling will not always destroy the excessive salinity.

By a happy application of the phrase, Lord Rhondda once described Germany as trying to be the Autocrat of the Breakfast Table. "Rationing is the price of victory," he said, and rationing, in his view, represented "the British citizen cheerfully accepting the discipline that strengthens us for the long stress and strain of war.'

66

The Hon. J. R. Clynes, the new Food Controller, justly observes that our very daily bread becomes sacramental." That famous song of the "Caller Herrin'" was written to bring home to the bosoms of indifferent millions the peril uncom plainingly incurred each day by those who dare the deep to feed us. Those who go down to the sea in ships to-day are putting their lives in pawn for you and me. Therefore, if we dis card the nutritive remnants of the food they bring instead of gathering it into baskets, it is nearly as wrong as if we poured out their life-blood in a ruddy libation to the sacrilegious Hun.

Sir William Goode has put his finger on the central vertebra of Mr. Hoover's work in saying: "The frankness with which he has treated the American public, his utter lack of selfseeking, and his disregard of all political considerations and departmental traditions have brought the whole of the American Nation behind the back of this man who a year ago had taken no part in purely American affairs."

L'

IKE painting, sculpture has had an apparently continuous history. One school has seemed to grow out of another, occasionally broken by a surprising figure like Michael Angelo. The death of Rodin, however, the hue and cry about Mr. Barnard's "Lincoln," the exhibitions in New York City of the works of Andrew O'Connor, Paul Manship, and Victor Brenner's bas-relief of Dr. Lyman Abbott, and the special exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum, may well have drawn attention, we think, to various tendencies in the history of sculpture.

We are impressed by two main tendencies: the first towards mere line, the second towards emphasizing light.

The first tendency must have started with the primitive sculptors; certainly we know it through the early Greeks. Though their technical skill was defective, they sought to copy nature minutely. The tendency has continued with ever less of Greek hardness and ever more of anatomical correctness until we have the fine work of academic French sculptors such as Dubois, Carpeaux, Mercié, and of such eminent Americans as SaintGaudens and Daniel French-masters of clear precision of line, even though their work may betray a certain tightness. Their school is emphatically one of delicate appreciation of form, its grace, refinement, and dignity. In its highest estate this school becomes one of accurate, beautiful, and sometimes heroic and monumental outline.

The second tendency, of greater largeness of design and more massiveness of material, sprang, we suppose, from Phidias, if not from some earlier unknown, and has continued in the contemporary work of Rodin in France and Barnard in this country-artists whose works reveal fluency and vitality. Their forms, however, are less precise and are seen as if surrounded by atmosphere.

Let us contrast the two tendencies in past and present sculpture. The forms of Praxiteles seem purer and more dignified to us than do those of Phidias. But as we look closely at them

those of Praxiteles are apparently checked in any simulated 'movement, while those of Phidias seem in continued movement. The same thing is true of the contrast in the work of Dubois and Rodin: the forms of the sculptor first named are detailed but cold; those of the second are less defined but more alive.

.

Mr. Manship and Mr. O'Connor would seem to belong to both schools of sculpture. But the emphasis of one man differs from that of the other. Though Mr. Manship's figures are buoyant with life, he apparently emphasizes line the more. Mr. O'Connor, on the other hand, while reflecting the instinct of his master, Daniel French, for line and for sheer decorative beauty, shows a Rembrandt-like emotion which hides as well as depicts line the principle that without pose or apparent design of line sculpture shall appear capable of any gesture which the hidden spirit within might call on it to make. We see this in Mr. O'Connor's "Crucifixion " above the entrance to St. Bartholomew's Church, New York City, in his statue of General Lawton, and also in his statue of Lincoln. The "Lincoln " is to be placed before the Capitol at Springfield, Illinois. In view of the discussion concerning Mr. Barnard's figure of the great Emancipator, the O'Connor statue is doubly noticeable, and our illustration of it (in The Outlook of January 16, 1918) was thus timely though no piece of sculpture, we believe, can ever be adequately expressed pictorially. This is true of the illustration of the Brenner bas-relief on this page. In our opinion, both as impressions of types and as studies of character, busts and bas-reliefs sometimes appear to have a certain advantage over full-length statues. As to types we seem to have had proof of this in the O'Connor exhibition, and as to character in the bas-relief below. Busts and bas-reliefs are often a further remove than are full-length statues from the accidental, the momentary, the changing. They give us not the temporary but the permanent. They are not wanting in authority.

I

N discussing this war we often speak of it as a war between nations, and speak of the German Empire as if it were a nation subject to the rules and entitled to the benefit of international law; but the Kaiser and his associates in the Prussian military autocracy have put themselves outside the pale of international law. Long before the war began the Kaiser declared, "Nothing must henceforth be settled in the world without the intervention of Germany and the German Empire." By international law, however, "nations are equal in respect to each other and entitled to claim equal consideration for their rights."

So far from being satisfied with the natural development of her manufactures, her agriculture, and her commerce, the German leaders maintained the right and the duty to make war for the acquisition of territory and the destruction of rivals. Bernhardi declared," France must be so completely crushed that she can never again cross our path.'

66

In reference to the conduct of war they were even more audacious. Nietzsche describes the German warriors: These men are, in reference to what is outside their circle (where the foreign country begins) not much better than beasts of prey. . . . They feel that they can revert to the beast of prey conscience like jubilant monsters who, perhaps, go with bravado from the ghastly bout of murder, arson, rape, and torture." This description has been realized during the present war.

It is true that before the war the Imperial Governments went through the form of sending delegates to international conventions. The most notable of these was at The Hague, in 1907. In one of the conventions adopted at The Hague, and signed by the delegates of Germany and Austria, it was agreed: "Arbitration is recognized by the contracting Powers as the most effective and at the same time the most equitable means of settling disputes which diplomacy has failed to settle." In order to facilitate immediate recourse to arbitration, an arbitral tribunal had been established.

Another convention, signed by the same delegates, regulated the laws of land warfare. Among other things, it was agreed that prisoners of war should not be employed in works that had any connection with the war operations. "All necessary measures should be taken to spare as far as possible buildings devoted to religious worship, arts, science, and charity, historical monuments, and places of assembly of sick and wounded." "The honor and the rights of family, the life of individuals, and private property should be respected." "Private property shall not be confiscated." Contributions in money in occupied territory shall be levied "only for the needs of the army or of the administration of said territory." "Looting is positively forbidden." Hospital ships shall be respected. The bombardment of undefended cities or villages is forbidden. "It is forbidden to lay submarine mines off the coasts and ports of the enemy with the sole object of interrupting commercial navigation."

Long before these conventions were made it was a principle of international law that a merchant vessel should not be cap tured without giving to the passengers and non-combatants on board an opportunity to depart in safety.

From the beginning of the war every one of these sacred rules has been persistently and brutally violated by the Germans and the Austrians. With the approval of Germany, at the outset Austria refused to arbitrate the matter in difference between herself and Serbia. They have thus placed themselves outside the pale of civilized communities and have become nothing more than organized bands of pirates, entitled to no more consideration than were the buccaneers. These also had a certain rude government. Their principles of action were similar to those of the Germans and Austrians in this war. They were finally suppressed.

It is our business in this war to suppress the buccaneers of the twentieth century. We shall win the war. Overtures for peace will be made, as they have been made, the design of which has been and will be to enable these pirates to retain as much

of their booty as possible. Such peace would simply give them an opportunity to repair their losses and renew their attacks upon peaceful nations. What, therefore, we ought to obtain may be summed up in one famous phrase: "Indemnity for the past and security for the future.

To gain these results we ought to impose upon the conquered Imperial Governments of Germany and Austria terms which will execute themselves and will not be dependent on the good faith of those who have shown by their actions that they have no sense of honor, and love a lie more than the truth.

Before considering the terms in detail, let us note the analogy between the situation of the Allies in this war and that of the United States in 1865. Then, as now, we were fighting for fundamental principles. It was impossible for the United States to permit for a moment the dissolution of the Union or the continuance of a government founded on slavery. As Mr. Lincoln said in 1858-and the words are equally true to-day:

The real issue in this country is the eternal struggle between those two principles-right and wrong-throughout the world. They are the two principles which have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity, and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, "You work, and toil, and earn bread, and I'll eat it."

To establish forever the principles of justice and freedom. which are the foundation of the American Constitution we refused again and again to make any terms with the Confederate Government which involved its continuance or the continuance of slavery. We did not count the cost, either in life or in money, and we were deaf to every overture. We repeatedly offered protection to the rights of individuals in the South and compensation for emancipation. But on the two main points, the continuance of the Union and the abolition of slavery, we were inexorable. It is equally important now that we refuse any propositions for peace which will not include the destruction of the Prussian and Austrian autocracy and compensation, as far as possible, for the countless woes it has brought upon the world.

The details are far more complicated than they were at the end of the Civil War, but the principles are the same. Let us consider these details.

Indemnity for the past.

This indemnity should be based on the fact that it is the Prussian military system that is responsible. Indemnity, therefore, should be taken, not in the form of a Government payment, but by a seizure of the property of the guilty. Indemnity from the Government could be raised only by a loan. The taxes which would be levied to pay the interest on this loan would come in part, at least, out of the plain people. These have been deceived by a persistent system of falsehood, and thus have been like sheep led to the slaughter.

It is claimed by some that the great commercial and manufacturing interests of Germany and Austria joined from the first with the military caste, and that the war was the development of their joint greed and ambition. Whether this be so or not, it is at least clear that the commercial and manufacturing interests of Germany and Austria could have prevented the war. Whether or not, therefore, they actually promoted it at the outset is unimportant. They are jointly responsible. Some of their property in the Allied countries has already been seized. Whenever their property can be found in these countries, that should in like manner be seized. Their property in the Central Empires should equally be appropriated at the end of the war. The vast fund which would thus be available should be applied to make good the actual losses which have been inflicted upon the people of Belgium, France, Italy, Serbia, and Rumania. The German Government is responsible for the Turkish atrocities committed against the Christians. For these also reparation should be made.

When this is done, a suitable amount should be appropriated