as the tariff is a matter of international" tariff wars," no country can disregard the need of seeing that it gets its share of the benefits of the protective policy, and it should not ignore its duty in seeing that those benefits are justly distributed.

Congress

The second session of the Sixtysecond Congress began on December 4, 1911; it ended on August 26, 1912. It lasted 267 days. Only seven times before in our history has a session exceeded it in length. The Sixty-second Congress is Republican in the Senate and Democratic in the House. Much of the legislation passed at this session is good; some is bad. The more important measures which are to be classed as good include:

The Children's Bureau Act.

The Direct Election of Senators Amendment.

The Phosphorus Match Act.
The Parcels Post Act.

The Russian Treaty resolution.

The Eight-Hour Government Work Act. The Federal Regulation of Wireless Companies Act.

The Wireless Operators Act.

The Alaskan Civil Government Act.
The Industrial Bureau Act.
The Fur Seals Act.

Amendment to Food and Drugs Act.
The Panama Act.

The Act against prize-fight moving pictures. The Act to prevent filibustering on the Mexican border.

Several good laws for the army and navy. To offset these, there are few pieces of legislation against which to write the word ..bad save emphatically the Sherwood Pension Act. The events on the "bad" side are mostly sins of omission, not of commission. Congress's sins of omission are its failuresTo pass needed tariff legislation. To pass needed trust legislation. To pass needed monetary legislation. To pass needed naval legislation. To abolish the involuntary servitude of

seamen.

To pass a workmen's compensation bill.
To extend agricultural education.

To act on the President's civil service recommendations.

The record of the session on the tariff may be summed up in the following results :

A Wool Bill and a Steel Bill passed Con

gress, were vetoed, and were repassed by the House but not by the Senate.

The Chemical Bill was killed in the Senate. The Cotton Bill died in conference.

The Sugar Bill passed by the House was rejected by the Senate; and the Sugar Bill passed by the Senate was blocked in conference by the House.

The Excise Tax Bill, to replace the revenue to be lost if the House Sugar Bill had passed, died in conference.

More than a hundred thousand dollars has been actually expended, and as much more appropriated, by the House in a programme. of investigation.

statements of its leaders, set out to make a record for economy. But we doubt very much if the means which it adopted to this end will commend themselves to the country at large. of a battle-ship, attempting to cut down the army, trying to eliminate some necessary bureaus in the Department of State, parsimony in making appropriations for the Government service, and abolishing the bi-partisan Tariff Board. On the other hand, the Democrats did not hesitate to pass a dollar-aday service pension law involving additional expenditure of about $75,000,000, afterwards reduced by the Senate to $25,000,000 annually. The record of this session was further marked by an unprecedented use of "riders.” The

They included depriving the navy

rider" involves an endeavor to get through legislation, by attaching it to another piece of legislation, which could not be passed if the attempt were made to pass it by itself. Riders were attached to the appropriation bills for the army, pensions, the post-office, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, and the Sundry Civil Bills.

Bill.

It was also the case with the Panama Some of the "riders" proposed were good, as, for instance, the parcels post provision in the Post-Office Bill and the free ships provision in the Panama Bill; and some, like the latter provision, were more cognate to the general subject of the bills to which they were attached than were others. But the principle of legislation by rider," especially when attached to an appropriation bill, is thoroughly bad. By the courageous use by the President of the veto power. there were prevented such spiteful pieces of mischief as Congress intended to perpetrate

In the realm of foreign Congress and Foreign Relations relations, any analysis of the work of the session must give prominence to three acts. The first was the joint resolution passed which forced the President to take immediate steps to abrogate the Russian treaty because of the Russian Government's persistent refusal to honor the passports of American citizens of Jewish faith. The second was the passage by the Senate of the Lodge resolution, growing out of the Magdalena Bay incident, and amplifying the Monroe Doctrine by asserting our Government's policy toward other Governments obtaining control of strategic harbors or bases of mine operation. The third is of course the act providing for the opening and operation of the Panama Canal, a measure that closely affects our foreign relations. As to the Senate's failures to pass proposed treaties, the most notable was when it refused to pass the general arbitration treaties with Great Britain and France recommended by the Administration, and approved them only in a shape not acceptable to the Administration, so that ratifications have never been exchanged. What is of more practical importance, especially in view of the present revolution in Nicaragua, is the Senate's failure to accept the treaties with Honduras and Nicaragua designed to prevent revolutionary activity in those countries. But perhaps the most important thing accomplished at this session was not legislation at all-the ousting of Senator Lorimer. When the inside history of this Congress is written, it will be seen, we believe, that the Lorimer contest was interwoven with the whole programme of legislation, and that it was the real cause of the failure of Congress to adjourn before the two National Conventions, rather than the natural desire of Congressmen to see how those Conventions "came out" and then "play politics."

egraph systems. With Mr. Vail's taking the headship of the Western Union Telegraph system the spirit of that system has been radically changed, and the feeling of hostility to the Western Union Telegraph Company is rapidly disappearing. He has evidently set himself to work to make the telegraph minister to the needs of the American people. He has made connections with the telephone and the telegraph such as facilitate the sending of telegrams from any telephone station -and telephone stations are far more frequent than telegraph stations. He has arranged so that men who have acknowledged credit can send telegraph messages

collect." And he has created the system of Day Letter and Night Letter, which has immensely enlarged the practical value of the telegraph, making it a real means for the conduct of quick correspondence. In this interview he tells three things which a great many Americans wish to know. The first is what are the qualities which enable a man to earn a salary of from $10,000 to $25,000 a year. He must, first of all, know his business from the ground up. He must be absolutely efficient; that is, he must have ability, judgment, courage, enthusiasm, selfconfidence, energy, initiative, foresight, experience, a great knowledge of human nature, and personality enough to be a real leader of men. He must take infinite pains in small things as well as in large. He must demand of himself as well as of others nothing but the best." It is true that society does not pay the highest price for the best service. It pays more to many a hotel chef than it pays to most college presidents, although giving luxurious food is not a greater service than giving a fine education. But in each particular department of life society pays for the service rendered in fair proportion to the value of the service, as society estimates it. Men with the qualities described by Mr. Vail find plenty to do, and fair, if not great, remuneration for the doing, in whatever department of life they may choose their work.

the cost of construction and to the rent. People are far too apt to forget that it is not the tiled bath-room that keeps you clean; it is soap and water." We have come into an era of high living, and we must pay high prices for it. We must cut off useless and enervating luxuries, of course, but not the comforts which add both to the joy and the efficiency of life; and the comforts which add both to the joy and efficiency of living cost somebody service, and therefore cost money to remunerate for that service. What is far more important than finding out how to reduce the cost of living is finding out how so to equalize wealth that the very rich shall lose the luxuries which enervate and degrade them, and the common people shall have the means to pay for the comforts which add joy and efficiency to life. Mr. Vail's third statement goes to the root of the question, Shall government disorganize big business, regulate big business, or carry on big business? The individualist says government should disorganize big business; the Progressive says government should regulate big business; the Socialist says government should carry on big busi

ness.

Mr. Vail's position, which is the position of an increasing number of the great captains of industry, the great leaders of labor, and the great teachers of political economy, is summed up in the following paragraph:

No government can run business, and no business can run the government. Our form of government was never intended to run business; it was not cut out for that; its organization is different. It is the duty of the government to conserve our rights and privileges, and to see that we all enjoy them. That applies to the rich as well as to the poor, and to the strong as well as to the weak. This duty of conservation gives the government the right to regulate business, and I want to say that it is far easier to regulate business than to run it. Take the men who are looked upon as great captains of industry. There are very few of them, because there are very few men who can run a big business or a big corporation. But there are any quantity of men who could review their acts, and who-if they had the proper information and gave the question proper examination and study-could say whether or not the men who were doing things were doing them right.

In this paragraph Mr. Vail answers with remarkable brevity and terseness the principal objection to the proposition that government should regulate big business, and we recommend the paragraph to the studious consideration of our Senators and Representatives

and all campaign orators in the pending Presidential election.

A little more than a year ago in April, 1911. certain American newspapers gave wide circulation to the positive statement that Japan and Mexico had entered into a secret treaty hostile to the interests of the United States, and that a photographic copy of such treaty was in the possession of our Government. A little more than a week ago-in August, 1912— the same newspapers published an equally positive statement that Japan and Russia had entered into a secret agreement to oppose the aims and undermine the interests of the other Powers in eastern Asia, and, eventually, to intervene jointly in China for the purpose of strengthening their positions in Manchuria and Mongolia and securing, as far as possible, Russo-Japanese control in Far Eastern affairs. The secret Japanese-Mexican treaty of 1911 proved to be non-existent. No such treaty had ever been made, and the story of the photographic copy of it was a fake. There is good reason to believe that the alleged secret Russo-Japanese agreement of 1912 is also non-existent, and that the story of the negotiation of it by Prince Katsura and Premier Kokovtsef is either a fake or a flimsy tissue of unsupported assertions and plausible guesses woven about the solitary fact that the ex-Premier of Japan stopped in St. Petersburg in July, on his way to Germany and western Europe. An alliance of Russia and Japan for the attainment of the objects set forth in the story of their secret agreement seems improbable. In the first place, their alleged conspiracy to get control of Manchuria and Mongolia, crowd out the other Powers, and dominate China is in flagrant violation of at least half a dozen treaties, agreements, understandings, and declarations, beginning with the Treaty of Portsmouth in 1905, and ending with the statements of policy by the Russian and Japanese Ministers of Foreign Affairs in 1911 and 1912. Both Governments have bound themselves not to intervene in China without previous consultation with the other interested Powers (Japanese declaration of November 30, 1908, and Russian reply to Secretary Knox in January, 1910), and both have repeatedly committed themselves to the policy of equal opportunities and the

The Alleged
Russo-Japanese Alliance

open door. Of course either Power may break its promises, violate its agreements, and disregard its treaty obligations; but is Russia likely to do so? Certainly we do not expect Japan to dishonor herself in that way.

The alleged statements of Prince Katsura and Baron Goto, which the story puts in quotation marks, are manifestly faked, because they are inconsistent with the opinions of Prince Katsura as set forth in the authorized Imbrie interview, and are in violation of the principles laid down in the RootTakahira Declaration of November 30, 1908.

with regard to their interests in China is embodied in the Russo-Japanese treaty of July 4, 1910. That treaty assumes that, inasmuch as Japan and Russia have covenants with China to which the other Powers are not parties, they (Japan and Russia) have certain treaty rights in Manchuria to which the other Powers are not entitled-rights that are peculiarly their own. Such rights are not exclusive of the rights of other Powers, but are outside of them. They are rights which Russia and Japan have acquired by treaty, at the cost of treasure and blood. In defense of these rights, which they regard as distinctively their own, Japan and Russia agree to act together, so far as they can do so without violating the promises that they have made to the other Powers concerning equal opportunities and the open door. Japan has made nine treaties with China since the Russo-Japanese War, eight of them relating to Manchuria; and Russia has made seven treaties with the same Power since 1896, six of them relating to Manchuria. These treaties, for the most part, deal with railway administration and business enterprise in the strip of leased territory through which the railways run. As the interests of the two Powers in this strip are practically identical, they naturally stand together in defense of them. They have certain rights there which we have not, just as we have certain rights in Cuba which the other Powers have not; and when an attempt is made to infringe such rights, they stand together in opposition to it, as they did in the case of the proposal to neutralize the Manchurian railways, which was made by Secretary Knox in 1909. This probably is the only basis of

fact that the story of a secret Russo-Japanese agreement has. The treaty of July 4, 1910, was not aimed at the other Powers, so far as we know, nor was any objection made to it either by the other Powers or by China herself. In reply to a note from the representatives of Russia and Japan transmitting a copy of the convention, the Chinese Foreign Office said:

This Ministry is perfectly satisfied that, inasmuch as Russia and Japan bind themselves by this agreement to respect the various treaties that now exist between China and Russia, China and Japan, and Russia and Japan, said agreement is a new and solemn confirmation of the promise made by Russia and Japan, in the treaty of 1905, to recognize the sovereignty of China in Manchuria; to acknowledge the equal right of the foreign Powers to co-operate with China in the development of Manchurian trade and industry; and to maintain the principle of the open door.

Reports that Russia and Japan are seeking to oust the other Powers and secure for themselves the hegemony of the Far East will probably continue to circulate so long as there is money to be made by the promotion of international discord and the creation of war scares; but the authors of such reports should try to improve their literary methods. The story of the secret Russo-Japanese agreement of 1912 is no more plausible or convincing than the story of the secret Japanese-Mexican treaty which was said to have been photographed by Ambassador Wilson in 1911.

The Roman Catholic Opportunity in Peru

The region in Peru between the Putumayo and Japura Rivers, affluents of the Amazon, consists of thousands of square miles of thick forest. It is inhabited by scattered tribes of Indians. Apart from these the only population consists of the employees of a concern engaged in overseeing and forcing the Indians to collect and deliver at fixed intervals definite quantities of rubber derived from the wild rubber trees scattered through the forest. The Indians are practically slaves. The region is controlled principally by the Aranas, a Peruvian family, who, five years ago, turned their rubber purchasing concern into a British company, now called the Peruvian Amazon Company, Limited.

Attention was drawn to the operations of this company some years ago by a series of articles in the London "Truth." As the result of pressure from the British Foreign Office, the company entered upon its own

investigation, while the British Government itself despatched Sir Roger Casement to make an official investigation. The Outlook has already reported the result of Sir Roger's mission-a story of horrible cruelty, oppression, and outrage. In the greedy rush for rubber the wretched Indians have not only been oppressed while they lived, but their lives have ultimately been taken, so that of some fifty thousand Indians said to be dwelling in the region early in the century, only one-fifth of that number are now admitted to exist. It is true that many have fled; but it is also claimed that thousands have been slaughtered. Despite denials to the contrary, there are indications that practically nothing is being done to improve the lot of the Indians in the Putumayo country. During the first half of the present year rubber has been collected in greater quantities than ever before; under present conditions every pound of rubber means torture of helpless people. Their condition should, and must, be immediately changed. Peru, it is true, claims to be instituting a new régime of reform and civilization. But against this claim it is urged that she has neither the administrative capacity, the power, nor the money. However much the Church in Peru may wish to engage in reform, it is also too poor to do so. But, in order to be most effective in a Latin-American land, humanitarian effort should have, if possible, a religious character; and as Peru recognizes the Roman Catholic Church only, any mission to be really efficient should operate under its .auspices. While the natives are as yet in no state for distinctly religious propaganda, Sir Roger Casement declares that any mission should have the authority of the national and historical Church of Peru behind it. Sir Roger adds:

Neither the individual Peruvian nor his Government will recognize Protestant intervention as a legitimate religious act. It would be represented by those on the spot as a meddlesome act of foreign interference in their private concerns, which they would not tolerate. . . . A Protestant organization on the Putumayo would be the cause of much resentment, bad feeling, and a quite definitely organized opposition that would inevitably defeat the object it had in view, namely, the protection and the betterment of the Indians. . . . I feel that this is a case where it is imperative on humane men and women to do something to help the Indians, and I see no means of bringing help to them that can at all compare with those offered by a Roman Catholic mission. . . . The work, as it is, will be one of extreme difficulty for the one Church that can operate with least question or opposition. . . . That the Church of Rome . . .

is in the best position to accomplish this work I am profoundly convinced, and, were I ten times a Protestant, I should never hesitate to help its missionaries to the extent of my ability to set up a rule of charity, compassion, and kindliness-a task they are eminently qualified to fulfill-among the unhappy tribes of this region. To help these poor people is a matter of urgency. It is not a matter that can be put off or discussed to-morrow. . . . It is a thing that must be done, or at any rate attempted, to-day.

The Lawn Tennis Championship

For at least three reasons, the result of the American All Comers' Lawn Tennis Championship Tournament this year is especially interesting to followers of that exhilarating sport. In the first place, the championship passes from the hands of a veteran to that of a youthful player. Mr. W. A. Larned won the championship last year for the seventh time. For about a score of years he has been in the front rank of lawn tennis players in this country. This year the title has been won for the first time by Maurice E. McLoughlin, who was born only twenty-two years ago. In other words, last year's champion was a skillful lawn tennis player when this year's champion was born. In the second place, the method of determining the championship has been changed. Heretofore the practice has been each year for the winner of the previous year's championship match to have the privilege of standing one side until the winner of the All Comers' Tournament was determined, and then to be called on to defend his title. From now on the champion of each year, if he wishes to retain his title, must enter the tournament like any other aspirant for the honor. This year Mr. Larned, on account of illness, was unable to play through the tournament. In the third place, this year's championship was notable from the fact that it goes for the first time to the Pacific Coast. With it goes the championship also of the ladies' singies and of the men's doubles. California has made a clean sweep of the National lawn tennis field.