Japan and the

Nations

In

The treaty recently entered into between Japan and Russia is concerned with various questions relating to navigation, the fisheries, and commerce generally, and it is expected that these definite agreements will remove the likelihood of a clash between the two Powers upon any of not a few dangerpoints connected with these matters. a broad way, the treaty provides that each nation shall treat the other on what is loosely called "the most favored nation basis," and that, with certain slight and necessary exceptions specified, the subjects of each nation shall enjoy equal opportunity with those of the other in which they may be living. It is widely reported in the European press that this commercial treaty between Japan and Russia will be followed by one of a political character similar in its provisions to that now existing between Japan and France. If these reports are correct, the two nations will agree to respect one another's present geographical delimitations, and perhaps to guarantee their integrity; while Russia on her part will ratify her recognition of Japan's supremacy in Korea, and in return Japan will support Russia's claims as to railways in northern Manchuria. Meanwhile the situation in Korea remains acute in interest. The Japanese troops have disarmed the Korean soldiers, and as a result riots broke out, in which it is said some fifty Korean soldiers and a much larger number of citizens were killed or injured. .It is understood that Japan has about thirty thousand soldiers in Korea; general armed resistance to her power is not to be thought of; rioting is futile and reprehensible. The supremacy of Japan over Korea is now firmly established and must be accepted as a historical fact; but it is true that Korea has, without serious fault of her own, fallen a victim to the international jealousies of Russia and Japan, and this ought to make it doubly imperative on Japan to provide instantly and efficiently for the protection of Korean personal and property rights. Last week Prince TjyongOui-Yi, who was one of the delegates to The Hague sent by the now deposed Emperor of Korea without Japan's con

sent, arrived in New York, and announced his hopes of arousing sympathy for his unfortunate country among Americans. His view of the Japanese in Korea may be taken with allowance for natural prejudice. Prince Tjyong declared that Japan is "nearly drunk with ambition to spread her power;" that she would like to have the Philippines; that the Koreans are determined to throw off the yoke of oppression; and that all classes of his people resent the injurious and insulting treatment of individual Koreans by the Japanese. He announces his intention to appeal for support and sympathy to the Great Powers, and says that he will return to his own country, although he believes that he goes to his death. In connection with this appeal to the United States, a recent semi-official report from the United States State Department may be referred to; it was there made clear that our Government had already looked into the question of the duties of the United States toward Korea under the treaty of 1882, and that it found no warrant for taking any active proceedings in the way of interference between the Korean people and their Japanese rulers.

An English Educational Reform

interference

The of the House of Lords in 1906 prevented the Liberal Government from remodeling the system of elementary education and taking all schools from under the close control which the Established Church and the Roman Catholic Church have so long exercised over most of them. But the Minister of Education has large administrative powers under existing acts of Parliament, and these are now being used to remedy some of the grievances of which Free Churchmen complain. One of the special grievances has recently been removed by the new regulations for the government and administration of training colleges for teachers. From the time these colleges were established in the fifties of the last century, many of them have been under the control of the Established Church; although, generally speaking, seventy-five per cent. of the cost of building and

maintaining them has come out of the Imperial Treasury. Their management, however, was in the hands of the Church; and hitherto it has been the rule that none but members of the Church could be admitted to these training colleges. There has never been sufficient accommodation in all the colleges-church and unsectarian for all the candidates for admission; and in hundreds of cases young men and women who had devoted four or five years to preparatory work for the teaching profession have been compelled to sever their connection with the church in which they were reared and to be confirmed according to the rites of the Established Church before they could obtain admission to a college and thus complete their training. Since the Test Act was repealed in 1828 teaching in the elementary schools has been the only department of the English civil service in which such conditions existed —a fact which has long worked injustice both to the teaching profession and to the Free Churches. Under the new regulation the religious test now disappears as regards any department of the public service; and it will not be possible for the Established Church to make it a condition of the admission of a candidate to one of its training colleges that he or she shall join the Church, or to exact a pledge from candidates that during their two years' sojourn in the training college they will attend any particular church. The new order is even more far-reaching; for it makes an end to a social exclusiveness which has long been maintained at some of the training colleges partly supported by the Government. These colleges made a specialty of training the daughters of professional men for teaching in the secondary schools, and they rigidly excluded the daughters of retail tradesmen and of wage-earners. The new order does not make this social exclusiveness impossible; but any institution which continues its exclusiveness will be removed from the list of colleges recognized by the Education Department and will forfeit the grants hitherto paid to it from the Imperial Treasury. The order thus recognizes a sound social principle and tends in the right direction,

America Urges Arbitration

It is somewhat difficult to judge from the press despatches precisely what progress is being made at the Hague Conference. A great variety of proposals have been presented, and they are being discussed in the four Commissions into which the Conference has divided for convenience and for systematized work. Even if a proposal is approved by one of the four Commissions, it must in the end go to the entire Conference before adoption and must be approved by each and all of the national delegations. Thus, when lately one of the Commissions approved by a substantial majority the American proposal to make private property at sea in time of war exempt from capture except in case of blockades, the result was gratifying, especially to Americans, and a tribute to Mr. Choate's eloquent argument, but it did not show that this important action would be taken ultimately by the Conference. Indeed, the indication was rather for the opposite course. Another American proposal was debated last week, and this-unlike the one just referred to above-did not relate to a change in the laws of war, but to the essential object of the Hague Conference, the world's peace. Arbitration, the establishment of more effective rules to govern a permanent Tribunal, and the provision for stated regular meetings of the Hague Conference itself-these are the great things that lovers of peace hope to see fully accomplished. As one of the Dutch delegates said in this debate, the extension of arbitration is the practical way to bring about limitation of armaments. The American initiative was approved last week, with some reservations, by Russian, German, British, and Mexican delegates. In supporting it, Mr. Choate read President Roosevelt's letter to the Peace Congress in New York last spring, and urged the formation of a court of such dignity, consideration, and rank that the best and ablest jurists of the world might be asked to serve upon it. The work of the present Hague Tribunal, he said, should be extended in its scope. In eight years only four cases have been submitted to the Tribunal, although its very existence

has undoubtedly encouraged the making of arbitration agreements among the nations without resort either to war or to a trial before the Tribunal. Now it is proposed to have all the judges' salaries and the cost of proceedings divided on some fair principle between all the nations, rather than to have, as now, these expenses borne by the countries actually in controversy. This would make the court free to all who appealed to its judgment. The judges are to be salaried officials, to sit at fixed sessions and for definite terms of service. And in other ways the constitution of the court is modified to make it more like that of ordinary law courts. In conclusion, Mr. Choate made an eloquent appeal for the supreme importance of developing and building up out of the present Tribunal one which would really satisfy the worldwide demand. "It is six weeks since this Conference first assembled," Mr. Choate said, "and there is certainly no time to lose.

We have done much to regulate war, and very little to prevent it. Let us unite on this great pacific measure, and satisfy the world that the second Peace Conference really desires that in the future peace and not war be the nor mal condition of civilized nations." Else where in this number of The Outlook the fourth of a series of letters from The Outlook's staff correspondent at The Hague will be found.

Prohibition

Georgia has adopted State prohibition. The passage in Georgia last week of a drastic measure making the sale of liquor illegal within the State is the result of an agitation that has been long continued. The lower house has on several occasions passed such a measure, but each time the Senate has defeated it. This year the Senate passed the measure, and, in spite of obstructive tactics, the lower house agreed. The Governor, Hoke Smith, although he is not a believer in the policy of State prohibition, had consented to give his sanction to the measure and make it law. For years Georgia has regulated the liquor traffic by a system of local option. The unit to which the choice between license and no-license

So suc

was allowed was the county. cessful was this system that liquor-selling was made illegal throughout most of the State. The result was that it was practically only in Atlanta, Augusta, Macon, Savannah, and some other cities of the State that liquor was legally purchasable. Virtually the whole rural portion of the State was under self-imposed prohibition. Of the hundred and thirtyseven counties, a hundred and three had adopted no-license. It would seem as if the success of local option would have encouraged those who were working for the restraint of the liquor traffic to continue their fight under that system. On the contrary, it encouraged them rather to seek State prohibition. The argument was like this: At present most of the territory of the State, containing about half of the population, is under no-license. no-license. In the rest of the territory of the State many of the people, forming a minority in each community, but when added to the rest of the population making a large majority of the whole State, are believers in no-license. This majority ought to rule; but the only way it can carry its will into effect is by abandoning local option and supporting State prohibition. As a consequence, the inhabitants of the rural districts have combined with a minority in the cities, and have given orders to the people of the cities that they shall no longer be allowed to purchase liquors of any sort. It will be illegal even for a physician to prescribe liquor as a medicine. That State prohibition will actually work in Georgia more effectively than it has elsewhere we do not believe. In Maine, prohibition, which is there embedded in the State Constitution, is still an issue. The sale of liquor in the cities, and even in the towns of moderate size, has been for years hardly less free, and in some cases freer, than in many cities where a license system prevails. vails. The breaking of the liquor law of Maine is notorious; it has developed among the people a disregard for all law which gives the best citizens of the State serious concern. The attempt to enforce prohibition in many cities of Maine has been almost continuously resisted. Similar conditions prevail in cities of

Kansas. Kansas City, Kansas, has been boasting of its enforcement of the liquor law practically a modification of local option for a prohibition State. Iowa tried prohibition-then passed a law to provide for its violation. If the experience of Georgia differs, the law and the conditions under which it operates will invite study.

The Railway and the State

By receding from its former position, the Southern Railway has ended the conflict between the State of North Carolina and the United States Circuit Court over the passenger rate law. At first, by refusing to obey this law on the ground that it was unconstitutional, and appealing to the Federal court for protection against the infliction of criminal penalties which the law imposed, the railway encountered the wrath of the State. Although it proposed to impound the difference between the rates which it was charging and the rates which the law allowed, and to return this difference to the purchasers of tickets if the case. should be decided against it, it could obtain no concessions from the State. Governor Glenn would not consent to anything but absolute obedience to the law while the case is pending. He even threatened to call the Legislature in special session for the purpose of depriving the railway of its right to do. business in the State. Week before last the State authorities issued a warrant for the arrest of President Finley of the Southern Railway; but Judge Pritchard, of the Federal Court, released him on habeas corpus proceedings. Almost immediately the railway accepted the terms laid down by Governor Glenn, and applied to Judge Pritchard to modify his injunction against the State authorities on its behalf. The terms which the railway accepted involved. both a retreat by the railway and certain concessions by the State. On the one hand, the railway agreed to abandon its former rates, and to put into effect on August 8 the 24-cent rate required by the law; and to appeal its case to the Supreme Court of the State, from which, if it is defeated, it can appeal to

the Supreme Court of the United States. On the other hand, the State will continue the action in the Federal courts; will dismiss indictments and prosecutions now pending; will not institute other indictments or prosecutions for any alleged violation of the law up to the time this new arrangement is put into effect, as far as the Governor can control the same;" and, through the Governor, will advise all people against bringing penalty suits until the present cases are decided. In the meantime the Southern Railway had to encounter last week restrictive action on the part of the State of Alabama. In accordance with an act which was passed last spring and went into effect on July 1, the State has revoked the license of the railway for removing a civil case from a court of the State to a Federal court. From the despatches which have come to us it is not clear in what respect this law differs from that which Judge Thomas G. Jones, of the Middle Alabama District, has declared unconstitutional. In Virginia there is a variation of this conflict over railway rates, inasmuch as there it is not a law but an order of the Railway Commission which has been enjoined by Judge Pritchard. Ultimately all these questions as to the constitutionality of rate laws and orders will have to be decided by the United States Supreme Court, and they ought to be brought before it in as speedy and orderly a way as possible. In the meantime it should be remembered: first, that the several States have no power to control inter-State commerce; and, second, that those States will promote both justice and prosperity which endeavor to harmonize their control of transportation within their boundaries with the control exercised over inter-State commerce by the Federal Government.